SH 

361 

U4- 
/9/3c. 


UC-NRLF 


SB    25    625 


A  STATEMENT 

SUBMITTED  IN  RE 


THE  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA 


TO  THE 


HOUSE  COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN 
THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE 


BY 


HENRY  W.UELL10TT 

DECEMBER  15,  1913 


TO  SUPPLEMENT  AND  COMPLETE  THE  REPORT  AND 
EXHIBITS  OF  THE  SPECIAL  AGENTS  OF  THE  HOUSE 
COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE  DEPART- 
MENT OF  COMMERCE  UPON  THE  CONDITION  OF  THE 
FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA  AND  THE  CONDUCT  OF 
THE  PUBLIC  BUSINESS  ON  THE  PRIBILOF  ISLANDS, 
AS  ORDERED  BY  THE  COMMITTEE  JUNE  20,  1913 


WASHINGTON 
1918 


x  , 

x 


LETTER  OF  TRAISTSMITTAL. 


WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  December  Id,  1913. 
Hon.  JOHN  H.  ROTHERMEL, 

Chairman  Committee  on  Expenditures 
In  the  Department  of  Commerce, 

House  of  Representatives,  Washington,   D.  C. 

DEAR  SIR:  I  wish  to  submit  for  the  information  and  the  use  of 
your  committee  a  carefully  prepared  statement  of  the  facts  which 
bear  upon  the  commercial  ruin  and  near  extinction  of  our  fur-seal 
herd  01  Alaska. 

I  believe  that  a  statement  which  shall  authoritatively  cover  the 
causes  of  that  destruction  of  this  fine  public  property  and  the  true 
relation  which  the  lessees  of  the  seal  islands  and  certain  sworn 
public  officials  and  others  have  to  that  ruin  of  the  same  will  be  of 
value  to  your  committee. 

I  therefore  inclose  this  statement  herewith,  duly  addressed  to  the 
committee  and  yourself. 

Very  respectfully,  yours,  HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

3 


L 


^48369 


gw/      KAJil  tA^ 


-    18 


.     t^f  pUftJL  •  ~+~4    fy*~ 
I 


-^U 


*\.  i/. 


JL^ 


<  - 


+t     ^ 


.      -ft 


STATEMENT  SUBMITTED  IN  RE  THE  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF 

ALASKA. 


MR.  CHAIRMAN  AND  GENTLEMEN  OF  THE  COMMITTEE:  I  desire  to 
submit  for  your  consideration  a  concise  statement  of  facts,  showing 
the  history  and  condition  of  the  fur-seal  herd  of  Alaska,  and  the  con- 
nection of  the  officers  and  stockholders  of  the  North  American 
Commercial  Co.,  as  lessees,  and  the  officials  of  the  United  States 
Government  and  others  therewith  since  1890  to  date. 

It  is  first  in  order  to  show  how  and  why  the  fur-seal  herd  of 
Alaska  has  been  commercially  destroyed  and  ruined  as  an  asset  of 
value  to  the  Government  ever  since  1890;  I  will  lead  by  giving  you  a 
brief  but  carefully  studied  statement  of  the  reasons  why  this  herd 
has  been  reduced  so  as  to  be  at  the  verge  of  complete  extinction 
when  the  act  of  August  24,  1912,  prevented  that  end. 

By  order  of  this  committee,  a  careful  survey  of  the  herd  was  made 
by  Mr.  Gallagher  and  myself  last  July.  We  have  given  you  in  our 
report  of  August  31  last  an  account  in  detail  of  its  condition. 

The  condition  of  this  herd  as  we  found  it  last  July  on  its  breeding 
rookeries  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  George  Islands,  Bering  Sea,  Alaska,  is 
one  of  complete  commercial  ruin  and  of  near  extinction  of  virile 
breeding  male  life. 

Happily  the  act  of  August  24,  1912,  prevents  any  repetition  of  the 
deadly  killing  of  young  male  seals  for  the  next  five  years  on  the  islands, 
and  makes  it  unnecessary  to  call  upon  Congress  for  anv  further 
legislation  in  the  premises  until  the  lapse  of  this  close  time  thus 
provided  for. 

It  now  becomes  in  order  to  clearly  show  how  and  why  this  herd 
of  4,700,000  seals  in  1874  has  been  so  managed  by  our  own  agents 
as  to  bring  it  to  the  pitiful  limit  of  less  than  1,500  breeding  bulls  in 
1913,  as  contrasted  with  90,000  in  1874 — with  less  than  30,000  non- 
breeding  seals — yearlings  and  males,  2,  3,  4,  5,  and  up  to  6  years 
old,  against  1,250,000  of  them  in  1874,  and  less  than  80,000  breeding 
cows  as  against  1,633,000  of  them  in  1874. 

It  is  an  easy  exhibition  of  cause  which  I  am  to  give  you,  as  follows: 

I.  The  fur  seal  by  its  law  of  life  breeds  but  once  a  year,  and  then 
during  one  short  period  of  that  year  only,  viz,  between  July  4  and  25. 

II.  This  makes  its  order  of  life  entirely  different  from  cattle,  sheep, 
horses,  and  swine,  with  which  it  has  been  erroneously  contrasted  by 
ignorant     or   scheming    "  naturalists,"    who    have    at   great    length 
declared  it  to  be  similar,  when  in  fact  it  is  utterly  and  irreconcilably 
different. 

III.  That  two  weeks  of  the  year  (between  July  4-25)  in  which  all 
of  the  cows  land,  give  birth  to  their  young  (a> single  pup),  and  are 
impregnated  for  another  12  months  of  gestation,  is  now  admitted  to 
be  the  " height  of  the  season"  by  every  observer  who  has  had  several 
seasons  of  personal  study  of  the  question  on  the  rookeries.     A  few 


6  FUR-SEAL  HEED  OF  ALASKA. 


Jtef  karri  "as  "early  as  June  16-24 — a  few  are  born  as  late  as 
August  1-5,  annually — but  these  are  the  natural  exceptions  to  the 
rule  of  their  lives.  The  fact  remains  that  the  breeding  of  these  seals 
is  all  begun  and  finished  practically  between  July  4-20  annually — i.  e., 
nine-tenths  of  it. 

IV.  This  fact  determined,  then  it  becomes  clear  to  the  investigator 
that  the  breeding  males  which  serve  these  breeding  cows  in  that  short 
period,  annually,  and  only  then,  should  be  the  very  finest  of  the 
species,  and — 

(a)  That  they  should  not  be  overtaxed  by  having  too  many  cows 
in  their  harems  at  that  period  aforesaid,  and— 

(6)  That  this  natural  selection  ordered  by  their  law  of  life,  which 
enables  only  the  finest  of  their  kind  to  get  into  the  rookeries  as  sires, 
should  never  be  interfered  with  by  man— 

(c)  Who  himself  can  not  make  that  selection,  as  he  can  of  the  best 
bulls,  rams,  stallions,  and  boars  for  his  herds  and  flocks  in  domes- 
tication. 

V.  To  make  this  natural  selection  of  the  very  finest  sires  for  the 
herd,  these  seals  are  born  equal  in  number,  males  and  females.     The 
male  becomes  mature  and  begins  to  breed  when  6  years  old — never 
any  earlier,  and — 

(a)  The  female  becomes  mature  and  receives  her  first  impregnation 
as  a  " nubile "  on  the  rookery  when  she  is  2  years  old.     This — 

(b)  Brings  the  female  in  as  a  breeder  and  requiring  service  four 
years  ahead  of  the  male;  and  that — 

(c)  Seems  to  make  the  natural  life  of  the  male  from  15  to  18  years 
and  that  of  the  female  less,  or  from  10  to  12  years  (reasoning  by 
analogy) . 

VI.  The  breeding  males  arrive  on  the  rookery  grounds  from  three  to 
six  weeks  in  advance  of  the  females ;  their  habit  is  to  locate  thereon, 
at  intervals  of  7  to  10  feet  apart;  these  locations  being  made  by 
those  bulls  which  can  successfully  fight  for  and  hold  their  location 
when  obtained,  and— 

(a)  This  fighting  between  the  bulls,  which  is  done  by  them  three 
to  six  weeks  before  the  cows  come,  eliminates  all  of  the  weaker  or 
nerveless  bulls  before  the  breeding  begins,  and— 

(6)  So  secures  for  the  cows  only  the  very  finest  sires  for  the  race, 
without  any  injury  to  the  females  or  the  pups  during  the  breeding 
season,  since — 

(c)  This  fighting  for  those  harem  stations  aforesaid  entirely  sub- 
sides when  the  cows  begin  to  haul  out;  and— 

(d)  This  location  of  the  breeding  bulls  hi  a  normal  and  natural 
state  brings  to  each  bull  about  15  or  20  cows  to  serve,  on  an  average, 
throughout  the  whole  rookery  (a  few  bulls  will  have  harems  of  40  or 
50  and  a  few  will  only  have  4  or  5,  perhaps,  but  the  natural  normal 
average  in  1874  was  about  20  cows  to  a  bull  on  the  big  rookeries). 

VII.  Any  disturbance  or  interference  with  this  natural  order  and 
adjustment  of  these  laws  of  breeding  as  set  forth  above  will  throw 
the  same  out  of  balance  and  effect,  and  thus  cause  the  birth  rate 
on  the  rookeries  to  become  less  and  less  annually,  as  long  as  this 
interference  is  continued,  up  to  the  point  of  complete  extinction  of 
the  species,  if  it  is  not  discontinued. 

With  the  above  statements  of  fact  clearly  hi  mind,  when  we  turn 
to  view  the  conditions  of  the  Pribilof  fur  seal  herd  as  it  was  plain  to 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  7 

see  last  July,  we  found  that  this  herd  consisted  of  80,000  breeding 
cows,  with  only  about  750  to  800  breeding  bulls  in  real  service  on 
the  rookeries ;  the  reason  for  •  that  loss  of  perfect  balance  was  at 
once  looked  up.  That  orie  bull  should  have  four  times  the  strain 
devolved  upon  him  as  a  sire,  which  the  natural  law  of  his  life  orders 
him  to  endure,  is  the  cause  of  just  concern  for  the  future  of  this 
species  if  it  is  to  continue;  for  that  continuation  means  more  and 
more  strain  added  annually  until  the  harems  will  show  200,  250,  yes, 
500  to  1,000  cows  to  the  bull,  as  thev  have  been  shown  to  the  greedy 
Russian  agents  hi  1896;  and,  soon  thereafter,  their  herd  collapsed. 

What  was  and  is  the  cause  of  this  practical  extinction  of  the  virile 
male  life  on  the  breeding  grounds  of  the  Pribilof  Islands  ? 

It  is  due  wholly  to  the  killing  of  all  the  young  male  seals  that  the 
lessees  could  annually  find  on  the  islands,  first  begun  hi  1896,  in 
violation  of  regulations  or  the  Carlisle  rules  of  May  14,  1896,  and 
then  continued  up  to  1904,  when  the  Hitchcock  rules  of  May  1  were 
published,  but  which  the  lessees  nullified  completely  by  1906,  and 
continued  to  do  so  to  the  end  of  their  lease,  May  1,  1910. 

A  plain  statement  of  the  facts  which  were  given  to  Mr.  F.  H. 
Hitchcock,  chief  clerk  of  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
and  upon  which  he  ordered  the  " Hitchcock  rules"  of  1904,  is  of 
interest  at  this  point,  to  wit:  On  January  8,  1904, 1  gave  him  the  fol- 
lowing analysis  of  the  reason  why  he  must  step  in  at  once  and  check 
that  close  killing  of  all  the  young  male  seals  which  his  agents  then 
were  permitting  the  lessees  to  take  or  face  the  complete  extinction 
of  the  breeding  male  life  on  the  islands  by  1907  or  1908: 

On  the  seal  island  rookeries  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  George  there  were 
(I  wrote  thus) — 

In  1872-1874  there  were  some  90,000  breeding  bulls  and  1,250,000  cows  (primipares, 
multipares,  and  nubiles),  showing  a  birth  rate  of  1.125.000  pups. 

In  1890  this  herd  was  reduced  to  some  14.000  breeding  bulls  and  about  420.000 
cows  (primipares,  multipares,  and  nubiles >.  showing  a  birth  rate  of  380,000  pups. 

In  1896  this  herd  was  still  further  reduced  to  some  5.000  bulls  and  about  144,000 
cows  (primipares.  multipares,  and  nubiles;.  showing  a  birth  rate  of  130,000  pups. 

In  1903  this  herd  is  reduced  to  some  2.200  bulls  and  about  75,000  cows  (primipares, 
multipares.  and  nubiles),  showing  a  birth  rate  of  68.000  pups. 

These  2.200  breeding  bulls  of  1903  are  the  survivors  of  those  young  males  which 
were  spared  in  1890  and  by  the  modus  vivendi  of  1891-1893,  and  thus  allowed  to 
grow  up  to  the  age  of  6  years,  and  then  take  their  places  in  1894,  1895,  and  1896  on 
the  rookeries  as  6  and  7  year  old  ''seecatchie." 

In  1894  and  in  1895  a  few  hundred  4-year-olds  may  have  escaped  the  club  on  the 
killing  grounds  and  thus  came  in  as  6-year-olds  in  1896  and  1897. 

But  in  1896  no  3-year-old  seal  was  passed  over  the  killing  grounds  which  was  not 
killed  in  1897  as  a  4-year-old. 

And  in  1897  and  1898  no  3-year-old  seal  escaped  the  killer's  club,  except  to  die  on 
the  killing  grounds  as  a  4-year-old  in  1898  and  1899. 

And  in  1899  no  2-year-old  seal  was  permitted  to  escape  on  these  grounds  unless  to 
die  as  a  3-year-old  in  1900. 

And  in  1900  no  well-grown  yearling  seal  was  spared  on  these  slaughter  fields  ex- 
cept to  perish  as  a  2-year-old  in  1901. 

And  in  1901  every  yearling  that  came  ashore  was  taken,  and  if  a  few  escaped  they 
met  the  club  in  1902  sure,  as  2-year-olds. 

And  in  1902  every  young  male  seal  that  landed  was  taken,  so  that  out  of  22,199, 
16,875  were  "long"  and  average  yearlings,  or  "5-pound"  or  "eyeplaster"  skins. 

In  this  clear  light  of  the  close  killing  of  the  young  male  life  as  given  above,  it  will 
he  observed  that  no  young  or  fresh  male  blood  has  been  permitted  to  mature  and 
reach  the  breeding  grounds  since  1896. 

The  average  life  of  a  breeding  bull  is  from  15  to  18  years;  he  does  not  keep  his 
place  longer  for  good  and  obvious  reasons.  The  youngest  bulls  to-day  upon  that 


8  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

breeding  ground  are  not  less  than  12  years  old — most  of  them  older.  They  are  now 
rapidly  dying  of  old  age — witness  the  following: 

An  official  report  in  1902  declares  that  these  breeding  bulls  had  decreased  in  num- 
ber from  1901  to  the  end  of  1902  at  least  25  per  cent, 

An  official  report  in  1903  again  declares  a  decrease  from  1902  to  the  end  of  this 
season  (1903)  of  17  per  cent;  42  per  cent  since  1901, 

The  close  of  the  season  of  1904  will  show  at  least  20  per  cent  reduction  again;  and 
in  1905  again  20  per  cent  at  least,  to  entirely  cease  by  1907  unless  steps  are  taken  at 
once  to  stop  the  run  on  this  life  by  land  (and  sea  killing)  clubbing  in  1904  of  the 
choice  young  male  seals,  yearlings  and  upward,  to  the  end  of  the  season  of  1906 — 
stop  it  entirely. 

These  facts  of  biological  truth  and  improper  violation  of  license  to 
kill  on  the  islands,  as  above,  were  bitterly  disputed  by  Dr.  David 
Starr  Jordan  and  his  "  scientists,"  who,  as  hi  associates  of  the  Jordan- 
Thompson  Commission  in  1896-1898,  all  united  in  denying  them.  But 
Mr.  Hitchcock  was  impressed  with  the  truth  and  sense  of  my  state- 
ment, and  issued  the  orders,  or  "  Hitchcock  rules,"  which  checked  up 
that  close  killing  I  complained  of,  May  1,  1904. 

Then  what  happened?  On  the^  26th  of  October,  1905,  the  very 
men  who,  in  1904,  had  united  with  Dr.  Jordan  and  his  "scientists/1 
Stejneger,  Lucas,  and  Townsend,  confessed  in  an  elaborate  report 
that  I  was  right — that  these  regulations  of  Hitchcock's  order  had 
been  made  just  in  time  to  save  the  breeding  life  of  the  rookeries  from 
ruin  at  the  hands  of  the  lessees.  Witness  the  following: 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY, 

Washington,  October  26,  1905. 

SIR:  I  have  the  honor  to  submit  the  following  report  on  the  administration  of  affairs 
on  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska  during  the  year  ended  August,  1905: 

******* 

There  were  so  few  bulls  on  certain  rookeries  on  St.  Paul  Island  this  summer  that, 
by  reason  of  their  scarcity,  the  harems  were  broken  up  before  the  usual  period  and 
bachelors  were  able  to  haul  among  the  cows. 

This  occurred  at  a  date  when  these  young  seals  should  have  been  excluded  from 
the  breeding  grounds  by  vigilant  bulls*  and  then  forced  to  haul  up,  if  they  desired 
to  haul  at  all,  only  on  tne  bachelor's  hauling  ground. 

This  condition,  in  our  opinion,  is  due  to  the  scarcity  of  breeding  males  on  the  rook- 
eries generally,  and  to  their  being  so  taxed  in  special  localities  with  the  service  of  the 
cows  that  they  were  unable  or  unwilling  to  drive  out  the  bachelors.  Had  idle  bulls 
been  sufficiently  numerous  this  condition  would  not  have  occurred. 

******* 

A  stop  was  made  at  Polovina  on  our  way  from  Northeast  Point  on  the  21st,  and 
Messrs.  Judge  and  Redpath  and  myself  visited  that  lookery.  We  were  not  able  to 
verify  our  assumption  with  regard  to  this  rookery.  By  reason  of  the  flatness  of  the 
approach  to  it,  only  the  rearmost  harems  could  be  inspected,  and  those  only  with 
caution,  lest  the  cows  be  stampeded.  While  we  found  six  2-year  old  bachelors  in 
two  small  harems  at  the  rear,  we  found  also  the  harem  formations  to  be  much  better 
preserved  than  at  Hutchinson  Hill.  The  bulls  seemed  active  in  preventing  the 
escape  of  the  cows  and  in  rounding  them  up  into  their  harems. 

The  fact,  however,  remains  that  only  3  idle  bulls  were  found  on  this  rookery  at  the 
height  of  the  season.  That  the  bulls 'present  with  cows  were  still  able  to  maintain 
their  harems  on  the  21st  is  more  a  trftute.  to  their  vitality  than  proof  that  enough 
adult  males  were  present. 

******* 

As  I  was  taking  photographs  of  the  rookeries,  I  went  ahead  to  make  the  necessary 
exposures  before  the  formation  of  the  cows  should  be  disturbed  by  the  counting  of 
the  harems.  Mr.  Judge  followed  with  two  natives  and  made  the  count.  He  stated 
that  the  bulls  were  practically  docile  and  that  no  trouble  was  experienced  in  pene- 
trating the  mass  of  seals.  He  stated,  also,  that  in  his  opinion  the  bulls  were  taxed  to 
such  an  extent  as  to  have  virtually  lost  control  of  the  breeding  grounds,  and  that  this 


FUB-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA.  9 

was  the  reason  for  their  unusual  amiability.     He  noted  also  that  a  great  proportion  of 
the  supposed  cows  scattered  about  were  bachelors. 

******* 
The  result  of  these  regulations  can  not  be  felt  before  1907,  as  has  in  effect  been  stated. 
During  the  interval  which  must  elapse  before  that  time  a  steady  decrease  in  bulls  will 
be  encountered.  The  closest  killing  on  land  occurred  during  the  seasons  of  1902  and 
1903.  In  the  latter  season  the  lessees  released  from  the  drives  on  St.  Paul  only  983 
small  seals.  This  practical  annihilation  of  bachelors  for  this  year  will  be  felt  on  the 
rookeries  four  years  thereafter,  or  in  1907. 

******* 

LIMIT   TO    PROCREATIVE    POWER    OF    BULLS. 

Much  has  been  said  of  the  wonderful  procreative  power  of  bulls,  and  the  theory  has 
been  advanced  that  a  bull  can  serve  without  discomfort  as  many  cows  as  he  is  able  to 
get  and  hold. 

Our  experience  this  summer  has  convinced  us  that  there  is  a  limit  to  a  bull's  capacity 
and  that  the  bulls  on  the  rookeries  at  the  height  of  the  season  had  come  nearer  to 
reaching  it  than  ever  before  to  our  knowledge.  When  it  was  possible  on  July  13  to 
penetrate  the  mass  of  breeding  seals  on  the  Reef,  and  on  July  14  that  on  Zapadni, 
meeting  with  no  more  opposition  than  could  be  met  successfully  by  two  men  armed 
with  light  poles,  it  must  be  believed  that  the  bulls  at  these  places  were  taxed  to  such 
a  limit  as  to  be  shorn  of  most  of  their  aggressiveness.  On  July  16  Mr.  Judge  with  two 
men  went  through  the  mass  under  Hutchinson  Hill  on  the  plateau  near  the  shore  line, 
and  experienced  but  little  trouble.  To  have  done  this  five  years  ago  with  the  same 
mass  would  have  been  impossible. 

******* 

The  present  scarcity  of  bulls  is  attributable  directly  to  close  killing  on  land,  from 
which  not  enough  bachelors  were  allowed  to  escape  from  the  killing  fields  to  maintain 
the  requisite  proportion  of  bulls. 

For  the  last  two  years,  however,  regulations  have  been  in  force  on  the  islands  as  the 
result  of  which  a  considerable  number  of  bachelors  are  exempted  from  killing  and 
allowed  to  escape.  The  animals  thus  saved  are  not  old  enough  to  appear  upon  the 
rookeries.  It  will  be  necessary  for  two  more  years  to  elapse  before  the  animals  may  be 
counted  upon.  From  that  time,  however,  with  the  continuance  of  the  regulations, 
it  is  believed  that  an  ample  supply  of  bulls  will  be  present. 

PRESENT  REGULATIONS  SHOULD  BE  CONTINUED. 

Since  it  appears  that  a  scarcity  of  bulls  is  threatened  on  the  islands,  and,  in  fact, 
curred  actually  on  several  of  the  rookery  spaces  on  St.  Paul,  any  change  in  the 
present  regulations  looking  to  a  lessening  of  the  restrictions  placed  on  killing  on  the 
islands  would  be  wholly  unwise. 

******* 
Respectfully, 

W.  I.  LEMBKEY, 
Agent  in  Charge  Seal  Islands. 
The  SECRETARY  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR. 

So  much  for  Mr.  Lembkey  in  1905.  Did  he  continue  these  regu- 
lations in  1906.  which  he  says  above  are  absolutely  necessary  to  be 
so  continued?  No!  I  had  the  following  to  say  to  your  committee 
July  30,  1912,  to  wit: 


.  what  has  become  of  that  "64-pound"  3-year-old  limit  by  which  he  has  sworn 
he  "saved  the  3-year-olds"  in  June  and  July,  to*  be  again  "saved"  by  him  as  such  in 
the  autumn  following  by  having  this  maximum  limit  of  "6£  pounds"  put  on  the 
taking  of  any  "food  skins  "?  Why,  they  are  all  killed. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  How  many  people  are  there  on  the  islands? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  About  300;  about  250  now.  Why,  those  3-year-olds  so  saved  are 
all  killed  later  in  the  season,  and  so  killed  as  being  under  the  limit  of  ''8$  pounds'". 
He  thus  stupidly  confesses  to  you,  as  above  quoted,  that  he  has  nullified  the  very 
rules  of  the  department  that  he  was  and  is  sworn  to  obey  and  enforce. 

The  Hitchcock  rules  ordered  a  "permanent  mark"  to  be  put  upon  these  reserved 
seals,  "and  under  no  circumstances  are  they  to  be  taken,"  etc.  Why  was  it  not 
done?  The  answer  is  easy.  The  lessees  wanted  those  skins,  and  they  manipulated 
Lembkey  as  above  —  they  got  them. 


10 


FUB-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 


How  was  that  manipulation  by  Lembkey,  in  turn,  done,  so  as  to 
jet  those  "reserved"  seals.  I  submit  the  following  expose*  of  the 
leceit: 


THE  LESSEES  SUBORN  LEMBKEY  AND  THE  BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES,  AND 


THEN    SECURE    ALL    OF    THE 

VIOLATION    OF   THE    SWORN    STATEMENTS    OF   THE    LATTER. 


OR  " SPARED"  SEALS,  IN 


THE    DEADLY   PARALLEL. 


Hftc.1a.rps     that    a 


pound  limit  to  food  skins  is  or- 
dered by  the  bureau,  and  that 
saves  the  "reserved"  seals  from 
subsequent  killing  by  the  lessees. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  Mr.  Chairman,  in 
the  matter  of  the  nullification  of  the 
Hitchcock  rules,  with  this  evidence  duly 
considered  by  your  committee  of  the 
illegal  killing  of  those  yearlings  seals  in 
1910  (and  that  evidence  of  this  guilt  ap- 
plies to  every  season's  work  on  the  Pribi- 
lof  Islands  ever  since  1890  down  to  May 
1,  1910),  I  desire  to  present  the  following 
testimony,  which  declares  that  ever  since 
May  1,  1904,  when  the  "  Hitchcock  rules  " 
were  first  ordered  by  the  Department  of 
Commerce  and  Labor,  those  rules  have 
been  systematically  and  flagrantly  vio- 
lated by  the  agents  of  this  department 
who  were  specially  sworn  to  obey  and 
enforce  them. 

On  February  4,  1911,  Chief  Special 
Agent  Lembkey  was  introduced  by 
Secretary  Charles  Nagel  to  the  United 
States  Senate  Committee  on  Conserva- 
tion of  National  Resources,  and  during 
his  examination  by  that  committee  he 
made  the  following  statement,  to  wit,  on 
page  14  (hearings  on  Senate  bill  9959, 
February  4,  1911,  Committee  on  Con- 
servation of  National  Resources)  : 

Dr.  HORNADAY.  How  many  "short  2- 
year-olds"  were  killed  last  year? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  understand 
your  term.  No  seals  under  2  years  old, 
to  my  knowledge,  were  killed. 

Dr.  HORNADAY.  What  would  be  the 
age  of  the  smallest  yearlings  taken? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Two-year-olds  rarely,  if 
any.  I  may  state  here,  Dr.  Hornaday, 
that  a  great  difference  of  opinion  exists 
between  Mr.  Elliott  and  the  remaining 
people  who  understand  this  situation. 
There  is  a  great  gulf  between  their 
opinions,  and  it  can  never  be  reconciled 
on  the  question  of  the  weights  of  skins  of 
2-year-olds. 

Prof.  ELLIOTT.  I  will  present  my  in- 
formation in  a  moment. 

Dr.  HORNADAY.  The  minimum  weight 
is  what? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Five  pounds.  During 
food  drives  made  by  the  natives,  when 


inst 
the  bureau  declare  that  that 


.But  the  official  instructions  of 

u 

pound  limit  has  been  raised  to 
8£  pounds,  and  that  Lembkev 
has  killed  all  seals  having  skins 
under  that  limit. 

[Instructions  issued  Mar.  9,  1906.] 

SEC.  8.  Sizes  of  killable  seals.  —  No  seals 
shall  be  killed  having  skin  weighing  less 
than  5  pounds  nor  more  than  8£  pounds. 
Skins  weighing  mroe  than  8£  pounds  shall 
not  be  shipped  from  the  islands,  but  shall 
be  held  there  subject  to  such  instructions 
as  may  be  furnished  you  hereafter  by  the 
department.  Skins  weighing  less  than 
5  pounds  shall  not  be  shipped  from  the 
islands,  unless,  in  your  judgment,  the 
number  thereof  is  so  small  as  to  justify 
the  belief  that  they  have  been  taken  only 
through  unavoidable  accident,  mistake, 
or  error  in  judgment. 

SEC.  10.  Seals  for  food.  —The  number  of 
seals  to  be  killed  by  the  natives  for  food 
for  the  fiscal  year  beginning  July  1,  1906, 
shall  not  exceed  1,700  on  the  island  of 
St.  Paul  and  500  on  the  island  of  St. 
George,  subject  to  the  same  limitations 
and  restrictions  as  apply  to  the  killing 
of  seals  by  the  company  for  the  quota. 
Care  should  be  taken  that  no  branded 
seals  be  killed  in  the  drives  for  food. 

[Instructions  issued  Apr.  15,  1907.] 
Identical  with  instructions  of  1906. 

[Instructions  issued  Apr.  1,  1908.] 
Identical  with  instructions  of  1907. 
[Instructions  issued  Mar.  27,  1909.] 

SEC.  10.  Seals  for  food.  —  Identical  with 
instructions  for  1906,  1907,  and  1908,  ex- 
cept in  addition  is  added  "The  maximum 
weight  for  food  skins  shall  not  exceed  7 
pounds." 

[Instructions  issued  May  9,  1910.] 

SEC.  11.  Seals  for  food.  —  Driving  for  na- 
tives' food  should  not  begin  before  Octo- 
ber 20,  and  care  should  be  exercised  at 
that  date  that  the  skins  of  seals  killed  be 
no  "stagey  "  to  a  degree  that  would  im- 
pair the  commercial  value  of  the  skin. 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


11 


the  seals  killed  are  limited  to  6£  pounds, 
in  order  to  exclude  all  these  3-year-olds 
branded  during  the  summer,  you  under- 
stand the  natives  do  kill  down  a  little 
more  closely  than  our  regulations  allow, 
for  the  reason  that  they  need  the  meat, 
and  since  they  have  to  exclude  all  these 
fine,  fat  seals  over  6£  pounds  they  go  for 
the  little  fellows  a  little  more  closely. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  How  many  seals  were 
killed  last  year  for  food  by  the  natives? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  limit  was  2,500. 
Speaking  offhand,  I  think  about  2,300 
were  killed. 

Q.  Were  any  females  killed? — A.  No, 
sir;  not  to  my  knowledge,  and,  as  I  stated, 
I  carefully  interrogated  these  two  gentle- 
men who  had  charge  of  this  killing,  and 
they  stated  that  to  their  knowledge  no 
female  was  killed. 

Q.  What  class  of  males  were  killed  by 
by  the  natives  for  food? — A.  Under  6£ 
pounds — 

(Hearing  No.  14,  p.  907,  July  25,  1912, 
H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  &  L.) 

Lembkey  swears  that  he  an- 
nually reserves  from  slaughter 


.000  3  year  old  male  seals,   be 


fore  anv  killing  is  done,  for  the 
seasor|  ir>  Jimp. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Before  any  killing  \yas 
done  this  summer,  as  has  been  the  practice 
for  some  years  past  following  the  bureau's 
instructions,  1,000  of  the  choicest  3-year- 
olds  appearing  in  the  first  drives  of  the 
season  were  reserved  for  future  breeders 
and  marked  by  shearing  their  heads,  so  as 
to  render  their  subsequent  recognition 
during  the  season  an  easy  matter.  These 
seals,  thus  marked,  were  immune  from 
clubbing  and  were  not  killed.  These 
3-year-old  seals  the  following  year  became 
4-year-olds,  the  killing  of  which  class  in 
general  is  prohibited.  Only  after  the 
1,000  3-year-olds,  known  as  the  breeding 
reserve,  is  secured  and  marked  does  the 
killing  of  seals  for  skins  begin.  The  kill- 
ing is  confined  only  to  the  2  and  3-year- 
old  immature  males  not  required  for  pur- 
poses of  reproduction.  To  obtain  these, 
the  breeding  rookeries  are  not  disturbed, 
but  the  bachelors  hauling  grounds  on 
either  island  were  driven  every  fifth  or 
sixth  day  if  seals  were  found  thereon  in 
sufficient  numbers  to  justify  driving. 
The  killing  season  begins  on  July  1  and 
ends  July  31.  but  one  drive  is  always 
made  subsequently  on  August  10  to  fur- 
nish the  natives  with  fresh  meat  during  a 
portion  of  the  so-called  "stagey''  season 
(when  the  seals  shed  their  hair),  which 
begins  August  10  and  ends  October  20, 


Drives  for  food  should  be  made  not  of  tener 
than  the  needs  of  the  natives  in  that  re- 
spect require.  Drives  for  food  on  rookeries 
remote  from  the  villages  should  not  be 
made  unless  the  carcasses  actually  are 
necessary  for  natives'  food  or  for  food  for 
foxes,  or  for  some  other  sound  reason, 
and  in  any  event,  care  should  be  taken 
to  preserve  for  future  use  the  carcasses  of 
such  seals  as  are  not  immediately  d's- 
posed  of.  The  number  of  seals  to  be 
killed  for  natives'  food  for  the  fiscal  year 
beginning  July  1,  1910,  should  not  ex- 
ceed 1,700  on  St.  Paul  and  500  on  St. 
George.  No  female  seal  or  seal  having  a 
skin  weighing  under  5  pounds  or  more 
than  7  pounds  shall  be  killed  during  the 
so-called  "food -killing  season."  Care 
shall  be  taken  that  no  reserved  or  marked 
bachelors  be  killed  in  the  drives  for  food 
or  at  any  other  time. 

[Instructions  issued  Mar.  31, 1911.] 

Identical  with  instructions  of  1910. 
(Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  483-486,  April, 
1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  &  L.) 

But  Clark  reports  that  thftsp 
reserved  seals  of  June  are  all  killed 
as  food  seals  in  October  following 
or  in  the  following  springT 

3.  The  reserve  of  bachelors. — Beginning 
with  the  season  of  1904,  there  has  been  set 
aside  each  spring  a  special  breeding  re- 
serve of  2.000  young  males  of  2  and  3  years 
of  age.  These  animals  have  been  marked 
by  clipping  the  head  with  sheep  shears, 
giving  them  a  whitish  mark  readily  dis- 
tinguishing them  to  the  clubbers.  They 
are  carefully  exempted  on  the  killing 
field  and  released. 

This  method  of  creating  a  breeding  re- 
serve seems  open  to  considerable  criti- 
cism, and  has  apparently  been  only  mod- 
erately successful.  The  mark  put  upon 
the  animal  is  a  temporary  one.  The  fur 
is  replaced  during  the  fall  and  winter,  and 
the  following  spring  the  marked  seals  can 
not  be  recognized.  The  animals  being  2 
and  3  years  of  age  are  still  killable  the 
next  season,  the  2-year-olds  in  fact  the 
second  season.  A  new  lot  of  2,000  is 
clipped  the  next  season,  and  these  are 
carefully  exempted,  but,  except  in  so  far 
as  animals  of  the  previous  season's  mark- 
ing are  reclipped,  they  have  no  protection 
the  second  season,  and  without  doubt  are 
killed. 

If  such  is  not  the  case,  it  is  difficult  to 
understand  what  becomes  of  them.  The 
annual  reservation  from  1904  to  1907.  both 
seasons  included,  would  aggregate  8,000 
animals.  These  animals  would  be  of  ages 
ranging  from  8  to  5  years  this  season.  The 


12  FUR-SEAL   HERD  OF   ALASKA. 

and  during  which  no  killing  is  done.—  only  animals  present  in  1909  which  could 
(Hearing  No.  9,  pp.  362,  363,  Feb.  29,  have  resulted  from  this  reservation  were 
1912.  House  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  the  513  idle  and  half  bulls.  Even  if  we 
Labor.)  assume  that  they  have  in  the  meantime 

replaced  the  entire  stock  of  breeding  bulls, 
this  would  account  for  only  1,900  of  them, 
and  the  active  bulls  were  for  the  most 
part  of  a  distinctly  older  class.— (Report 
G.  A.  Clark  to  Secretary  Naoel,  Sept.  30, 
1909,  p.  847,  Appendix  A,  House  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  and  Labor,  June  24,  1911.} 

Were  these  regulations  continued  ?  No.  As  soon  as  Mr.  Hitchcock 
was  promoted  to  the  Postmaster  General's  office  in  1905  a  person 
named  E.  W.  Sims,  "solicitor"  of  the  department,  was  put  in  charge 
of  the  fur-seal  business,  and  then  this  same  Mr.  Lembkey  was  pre- 
vailed upon  to  nullify  the  "Hitchcock  rules/'  so  that  in  1906  the 
lessees  secured  every  young  male  seal  that  hauled  out,  over,  and 
under  1  year  of  age  and  upward. 

This  close  killing  was  continued  on  the  islands  up  to  the  passage  of 
the  act  of  August  24,  1912,  which  stops  it  completely  for  five  years. 

And  this  close  killing  since  1896,  when  first  ordered,  has  been  done 
in  violation  of  the  regulations  forbidding  it,  up  to  date,  and  is  re- 
sponsible for  this  wreck  of  the  herd  as  we  find  it  to-day. 

What  is  the  loss  which  the  public  Treasury  has  suffered  since  1896 
by  reason  of  that  violation  of  law  and  regulations  then  and  since  (i.  e., 
reduced  to  a  matter  of  dollars  and  cents)  ?  I  answer  as  follows: 

I.  This  excessive  close  killing  of  the  young  males  has  so  disturbed 
the  balance  of  natural  order  and  the  system  of  the  breeding  rookeries 
that  instead  of  having  a  herd  of  1,000,000  seals  on  them  to-day  we 
have  only  190,555. 

II.  Had  it  not  been  for  the  work  of  the  pelagic  sealer  since  1896 
to  December  15,  1911,  the  harems  on  the  islands  to-day  would  be  at 
the  ratio  of  250  to  500  cows   (yes,  even  1,000)  to  1  bull,  and  that 
would  have  fairly  destroyed  the  species  by  1907-1909. 

IIL  Therefore  this  killing  so  close  and  in  violation  of  the  regula- 
tions~since  1896  to  date  has  cost  us  the  loss  of  over  120,000  seals  taken 
in  flagrant,  criminal  trespass  by  the  lessees  and  in  violation  of  their 
contract ;  but  it  has  also  cost  us  vastly  more  in  the  loss  of  the  earning 
power  of  this  herd,  which  should  have  been,  and  would  have  been, 
properly  conserved  had  it  riot  been  for  the  greedy  interference  of 
these  private  interests  when  foreign  governments  were  approached 
with  negotiations  for  the  elimination  of  pelagic  sealing  and  all  private 
interests  in  the  killing  of  seals  on  land  and  in  the  sea. 

IV.  The  sum  total  of  loss  actually  suffered  by  the  public  Treasury 
through  this  combination  between  the  lessees  and  our  own  agents 
and  officials  may  be  summed  up  fairly  as  follows,  to  wit: 

To  loss  of  120,000  "yearlings,"  (or  "eyeplaster  "  skins),  at  $30 $3,  600,  000 

To  loss  of  annual  earnings  of  a  fully  restored  herd  (as  it  would  have  been 
had  it  not  been  for  interference  of  lessees  in  1890-91),  of  4, 700, 000  seals 
from  1897  to  1913—16  years'  output  of  60,000  prime  skins  annually 48,  000,  000 

Total  loss..  .  51,600,000 


FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA.  13 

Or,  in  short,  and  to  be  nearly  exact,  we  have  lost  $3,600,000  by 
criminal  trespass  of  lessees  since  1896,  and  fully  $48,000,000  by 
improper  interference  of  lessees  and  others  with  negotiations  which, 
but  for  them,  would  have  been  successfully  consummated  in  1891-92, 
and  the  herd  fully  restored  by  1897. 

The  following  illustration  of  loss  suffered  on  the  rookeries  and  the 
hauling  grounds  of  St.  Paul  Island  holds  good  for  the  smaller  sister 
island  of  St.  George: 

The  acreage  of  the  breeding  rookeries  on  St.  Paul  Island  hi  1872- 
1874,  when  there  were  1,500,000  breeding  cows  and  90,000  bulls 
thereon,  was  144  acres. 

The  acreage  of  the  hauling  grounds  of  St.  Paul  Island  in  1872- 
1874,  when  at  least  1,500,000  yearlings,  2,  3,  4,  5,  and  6  year  old 
males  were  out  on  them  intermittently  during  the  season,  was 
3,200  acres. 

In  1890  this  acreage  of  the  breeding  rookeries  was  reduced  to 
one-third  of  1874,  or  to  46  acres. 

In  1890  the  hauling  grounds  of  1872-1874  were  practically  aban- 
doned, because  there  were  less  than  100,000  yearlings,  2,  3,  4,  5,  and 
6  year  old  males  out  on  them.  The  entire  area  then  visited  by  the 
holluschickie  was  not  more  than  one-tenth  of  the  breeding  grounds 
in  1890,  or  5  acres. 

In  1913  this  acreage  of  the  breeding  seals  had  decreased  from  its 
form  in  1890  at  least  five-sixths,  or  to  7£  acres. 

In  1913  the  hauling  grounds  of  1890  were  about  half  the  same 
area  as  then,  with  less  than  40,000  yearlings,  2,  3,  4,  5,  and  6  year 
old  males,  or  to  3  acres. 

The  object  in  view  which  has  stimulated  this  destruction,  as  above 
shown,  is  in  turn  exposed  to  view,  as  follows: 

Statement  of  the  net  profits  of  the  lessees  of  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska  from  1870  to  1910, 
inclusive.  From  items  gathered  during  the  seasons  of  1872-73,  1874,  1876,  1890,  to 
date.  July  29,  1910,  by  Henry  W.  Elliott. 

PROFITS    OF   FIRST   LESSEES,    ALASKA    COMMERCIAL   CO.,  OF    SAN   FRANCISCO,  CAL. 

(First  lease.) 

1870-1890  (20  years):  Total  catch,  1,856,224  seals;  of  these  when 
taken  during  the  seasons  of  1870-1878,  1884,  and  1885,  inclusive, 
the  catches  aggregated  969,374  seals;  the  average  price  per  skin 
realized  in  London  for  them  was  nearly  $11.20  per  skin,  or $10,  746,  989.  80 

The  balance  when  taken  during  the  seasons  of  1879-1883  and  1886- 
1889,  tl  e  catches  aggregated  886,850  seals; the  average  price  realized 
in  London  for  them  was  nearly  $18.50  per  skin,  or 16, 407,  225.  00 

Showing  a  gross  sum  total  of 27. 153,  514.  80 

From  this  gross  sum  total  the  cost  of  each  skin  at  $4.52$  as  incurred 
by  the  lessees  for  tax,  rental,  and  other  charges  incidental,  must 
be  subtracted,  or  the  sum  of 8,  399,  603.  60 


Declaring  a  net  profit  of 18,  753,  911. 20 

PROFITS   OF  THE   UNITED   STATES   GOVERNMENT  FROM  THIS  WORK   OF  THE   LESSEES,   AS 

ABOVE    STATED. 

Gross  revenue  derived  from  said  catch  of  1,856,224  seals,  each  skin 
paying  a  tax  of  $3.17  (tax,  rental,  and  bonus) $5,  894,  230.  08 

Less  cost  of  supervision,  patrol,  and  protection  of  the  seal  herds  from 
1889-1890,  21  years,  inclusive,  was  an  average  of  $30,000,  or  in  round 
numbers  a  sum  total  of. .  630,  000.  00 


Declaring  a  net  profit  to  the  Government  of 5,  264,  230. 08 


14  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

PROFITS    OF   THE    NORTH    AMERIACN    COMMERCIAL    CO.,  OF    SAN   FRANCISCO. 


1890-1910  (20  years):  Total  catch,  343,365  seals.  With  the  exception  of  the  sea- 
sons of  1894-1898,  inclusive,  the  average  price  has  been  $28  per  skin;  the  highest 
average  was  in  1890,  when  it  went  to  $36.50  (due  to  all  "prime  skins"),  and  the  low- 
est was  in  1897,  when  it  fell  to  $15.50;  the  last  sale,  1909,  was  $30  and  made  up  of 
"small  pup"  or  "eyeplaster"  skins  chiefly. 

This  record  of  the  second  lease  declares  that  its  aggregated  catch  of 
343,365  skins  sold  in  London  for $9,  614,  222.  00 

From  this  gross  sum  total  the  cost  of  each  skin  at  $13.45  for  tax,  rental, 
and  other  incidental  charges  must  be  subtracted,  or  the  sum  of 4,  637,  646.  00 

Declaring  a  net  profit  of ! 4,  976,  574.00 

Profit  of  the  United  States  Government  from  this  work  of  the  lessees 
as  stated  above,  derived  from  said  catch  of  343,365  seals,  each  skin 
paying  a  tax,  rental,  and  bonus  of  $10.22 3,  509, 190.  30 

Less  cost  of  patrol,  supervision,  and  protection  of  this  seal  herd  from 
1889  to  May  1, 1910,  20  years,  at  an  average  cost  from  start  to  finish  of 
$250,000  annually 5,  000,  000.  00 


Declaring  a  net,  loss  of 1,  491,  809.  70 

This  in  brief  is  the  loss  fairly  and  conservatively  stated,  which  the 
Public  Treasury  has  suffered  by  the  mismanagement  of  our  fur  seal 
herd  of  Alaska  since  1890-91  to  date: 

I  have  this  to  say  anent  that  remarkable  combination  which  has 
been  made  in  Washington,  on  the  seal  islands,  and  elsewhere  to  loot 
and  ruin  this  fine  public  property. 

Whenever  facts  were  courteously  given  to  Secretary  Nagel  and  his 
associates,  these  men  either  denounced  the  action  as  an  "  imperti- 
nence" and  "meddlesome"  or  ignored  them. 

Of  course  this  is  the  natural  result  of  a  partnership  between  the 
Government  and  private  business  interests.  Such  a  partnership  is  a 
close  corporation,  into  which  no  one  else  has  a  right  to  intrude. 

To  oppose  the  wishes  of  this  combination,  to  question  the  facts 
upon  which  it  relies,  to  suggest  that  any  others,  or  the  people  have 
any  rights  that  ought  to  be  considered,  even  to  seek  for  information 
outside  this  circle  of  the  interests  involved  by  the  lease,  all  this  was 
very  "tiresome*1  and  " impertinent." 

The  men  on  the  inside,  Liebes,  Mills,  Jordan,  Elkins,  Clark,  Lemb- 
key,  Bowers,  et  al.,  had  made  up  their  minds  that  certain  things  must 
be  true,  and  all  they  wanted  was  that  " evidence"  which  " proved" 
their  theory;  they  furnished  the  " evidence." 

They  did  not  want  the  truth  as  it  actually  exists,  but  the  "truth" 
only  in  so  far  as  it  conformed  to  their  preconceived  ideas  of  what  it 
should  be. 

With  the  foregoing  statements  carefully  made,  I  now  desire  to 
submit  the  several  items  of  fact  which  bear  directly  on  the  effect  of 
killing  yearling  seals  as  has  been  done  by  the  lessees  and  our  own 
agents  and  others,  upon  the  life  of  the  fur-seal  herd,  and  this  show- 
ing I  arrange  as 


EXHIBIT  I. 


In  Exhibit  III,  following,  are  the  itemized  lists  of  more  than  120,000 
yearling  seals  which  have  been  taken  by  the  lessees  since  1896,  on 
the  Pribilof  Islands,  in  criminal  trespass. 

The  sole  object  of  prohibiting  the  killing  of  yearlings  by  law  and 
regulations  was  and  is  to  prevent  the  killing  of  female  seals,  since 
the  sex  (,f  seals  can  not  be  told  apart  when  as  yearlings  they  haul 
out  upon  the  islands.  The  yearling  female  is  precisely  of  the  same 
size,  shape,  and  outward  appearance  and  behavior,  from  every  point 
of  view,  as  is  the  male  yearling.  Unless  she  is  caught  and  ex- 
amined by  our  hand  her  sex  can  not  be  told  truly  by  us  or  by  any 
human  being — only  guessed  wildly. 

Therefore,  as  it^is  utterly  impracticable  to  capture,  examine,  and 
separate  the  male  and  female  yearlings  on  the  hauling  grounds  or 
killing  grounds,  the  killing  of  them  as  a  class  has  been  prohibited 
and  wisely  ordered,  since  this  class  is  easily  reccgnized  on  the  slaugh- 
tering field. 

In  spite  of  this  prohibition,  w^hen  the  numbers  of  2  and  3  year 
old  male  seals  as  secured  ran  down  year  after  year  to  zero,  the  lessees 
in  order  to  get  the  full  number  allowed  them  of  2  and  3  year  old  seals, 
entered  into  a  combination  with  the  agents  of  the  Government 
and  slaughtered  the  yearlings  by  the  tens  of  thousands;  but  falsi- 
fied that  work  to  the  Government,  declaring  that  no  seals  had  been 
taken  under  2  years  of  age  since  1896.  The  details  of  this  malfea- 
sance and  fraud  on  the  part  of  the  Government  agents  and  the  lessees 
are  fully  given  in  Exhibit  III  (pcsted). 

In  order  that  an  adequate  idea  may  be'fYrmed  of  what  the  loss 
to  the  herd  is  when  female  yearlings  are  killed  (and  half  cf  the  120,000 
yearlings  taken  since  1896  were  females),  the  following  table  of 
increase  which  4,500  slaughtered  yearling  cows  in  1896  would  have 
brought  to  the  herd  is  given,  to  wit: 

Table  showing  the  natural  increase  of  4,500  yearling  cows  from  1896  to  1909  if  they  had 
been  suffered  to  live  undisturbed  on  the  Pribilof  rookeries. 


Year. 

Breeding 
cows. 

Pups. 

Yearling 
cows. 

Yearling 
males. 

Two- 
year-old 
males. 

Three- 
year-old 
males. 

Four- 
year-old 
males. 

Remarks. 

1896.... 

4,500 

1897.  .  .  . 

4,415 

1898.. 

4,327 

4,327 

« 

1899.. 

4,241 

4,241 

,031 

1,031 

1900. 

5,238 

4,157 

,001 

1,001 

1,666 

1901. 

6.106 

5,136 

,010 

1,010 

1,000 

990 

1902. 

6,997 

5,984 

,250 

1,250 

1,000 

1,000 

840 

1903. 

8,143 

6,859 

,450 

1,450 

1,350 

980 

850 

The  5-year  and  6-year 

1904. 

*    9,477 

7,981 

,700 

1,700 

1,650 

1,294 

800 

old  bulls  are  not  car- 

1905. 

11,073 

9,369 

,990 

1,990 

1,800 

1,500 

1,000 

ried    in    this    table, 

1906. 
1907. 

12,846 
14,912 

10,851 
12,590 

2,342 
2,700 

2,342 
2,700 

2,250 
2,600 

1,760 
2,200 

1,200 
1,500 

which  is  to  express 
the  loss  in  value  of 

1908... 

17,324 

14,614 

3,000 

3,000 

2,850 

2,600 

2,000 

commercial  skins;  all 

1909... 

20,225 

16,978 

3,600 

3,600 

2,940 

2,750 

2,250 

male    skins    over    4 

years  have   no   real 

commercial  value. 

15 


16  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

The  above  exhibit  declares  that  by  1909,  or  in  12  years'  time  from 
their  initial  or  first  impregnation,  July,  1897,  these  4,500  yearling 
cows  of  July,  1896,  would  have  increased  five  fold — to  20,225  breeding 
adult  females  and  to  16,978  pups  born  July,  1909,  to  3,600  yearling 
cows  of  1909  to  3,600  yearling  bulls  of  1909,  to  2,940  2  year  old  bulk 
of  1909,  to  2,750  3  year-old  bulls  of  1909,  and  to  2,250  4-year-old  bulls 
of  1909,  being  the  increase  of  4,500  yearling  cows  to  52,343  seals  in 
12  years— from  1897  to  1909. 

When  Lembkey  and  the  lessees  killed  yearlings,  they  knew  that 
they  were  females  after  they  had  killed  them  and  that  they  could 
not  tell  the  sex  until  after  they  had  killed  them.  In  his  report,  1904, 
page  55,  Appendix  A,  Lembkey  says:  "One  yearling  was  killed  by 
me  during  the  summer  to  determine  the  weight  of  that  class  of  skins. 
The  entire  animal — a  female  *  *  *  ."  Again  in  his  report 
he  tells  us  that  the  yearling  females  are  in  the  drives  with  the  yearling 
males,  and  that  he  killed  one  to  ascertain  its  weight  and  sex  (p.  77, 
Appendix  A),  to  wit:  "On  July  1,  there  were  three  yearling  seals  in 
the  drives  at  North  East  Point.  One  of  them,  a  typical  specimen, 
was  knocked  down  at  my  direction  to  ascertain  the  weight  of  the 
skin.  It  was  found  to  be  a  female  *  *  *  ." 

Dr.  Jordan  also  knew  that  the  yearlings  hauled  out  males  and 
females  together,  and  that  they  could  not  be  told  apart  as  to  sex  by 
outward  survey  unless  caught  and  handled.  He  is  officially  recorded 
as  follows  in  that  connection: 

ST.  PAULS  ISLAND, 

Saturday,  August  1,  1896. 

Dr.  Jordan,  assisted  by  the  natives  *  *  *  drove  up  part  of  one  and  two  year  old 
seals  from  the  Reef  Rookery:  they  were  examined  with  a  view  to  determining  whether 
or  not  yearling  seals  were  to  be  found  among  these  young  bachelors.  It  is  now  con- 
ceded that  yearling  females  do  not  haul  out  on  the  rookeries  but  among  the  hollus- 
chickie."  (Official  Journal  Government  Agent,  St.  Pauls  Island,  Alaska,  p.  465.) 

These  128,000  yearlings  which  were  taken  by  "criminal  trespass" 
between  1890-1909  were  so  taken  in  violation  of  law  and  regulations 
and  by  collusion  with  certain  public  agents,  who  had  guilty  knowledge 
of  this  work. 

One-half  of  this  number  of  yearlings  by  the  natural  law  of  their 
birth  were  female  seals,  which  were  to  become  nubile  mother  seals 
one  year  later,  and  which  as  such  would  each  live  from  10  to  12  years, 
bearing  annually  one  pup  during  that  period  of  their  lives. 

Therefore  this  killing  by  criminal  trespass  and  in  guilty  knowledge 
of  these  60,000  yearling  cows  has  cost  ths  Government  the  full  value 
of  that  annual  increment  to  the  seal  herd  which  those  cow  seals  would 
have  made  since  1896,  plus  that  increase  in  turn  which  their  offspring 
would  have  made,  and  so  on  in  turn  annually  up  to  the  season  of  1912 

Upon  a  basis  of  calculating  that  particular  loss  from  this  single 
killing  of  those  4,500  yearling  cows  in  1896,  for  example,  thus  sufferec 
by  the  Public  Treasury,  we  find  that  this  loss  from  a  systematic  killing 
of  yearlings  which  was  begun  by  the  lessees,  in  violation  of  the  Car- 
lisle rules  of  May  14,  1896,  in  June-July,  1896  (and  continued  by  them 
up  to  the  end  of  their  lease  in  1909),  to  be  fairly  stated  as  follows: 

We  start  with  4,500  yearling  cows  which  were  killed  in  1896;  in 
1897,  if  not  so  killed,  they  would  have  returned  less  2  per  cent  of  that 
number  from  natural  death  rate,  or  as  4,415  two-year-old  cows ;  they  go 
directly  to  the  breeding  grounds  and  are  there  impregnated  for  the 
first  time  as  "nubiles." 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  17 

In  1898  they  return  again  as  3-year-old  cows,  or  "primipares," 
less  2  per  cent  of  their  number  from  natural  death  rate,  or  4,327  new 
cows,  and  each  one  bears  one  pup.  They  are  again  served  and  leave. 

In  1899  they  return  again,  less  2  per  cent  from  natural  death  rate, 
or  as  4,241  "  multipass,"  and  bear  their  pups — 4,241  of  them.  In 
the  meantime  th?  4,327  pups  born  in  1898  have  returned  to  the  haul- 
ing grounds  as  "  yearlings,"  less  50  per  cent  of  their  number,  or  2,163 
of  them. 

In  1900  these  cows  return  again,  less  2  per  cent  natural  death  rate 
or  4,157  of  them,  and  bear  4,157  pups;  their  number  is  now  increased 
by  the  "nubiles,"  or  their  own  daughters,  which  come  out  with  them 
as  2-year-old  cows  from  the  yearhngs  of  1899,  or  1,000  "nubiles," 
making  5,238  cows  as  breeders  this  year. 

In  1901  these  cows  return  exactly  as  in  1900,  bear  their  pups,  and 
are  again  increased  in  numbers  by  the  ^nubiles,"  or  "  yearlings,"  of 
1900,  making  6,106  cows  as  breeders  this  year;  in  the  meantime  the 
4,327  pups  born  in  1898  have  returned,  less  50  per  cent  of  their  num- 
ber in  1899,  as  2,163  "yearlings,"  and  in  1900  these  "yearhngs"  have 
returned,  less  2  per  cent  of  their"  number  from  natural  death  rate,  as 
2-year-olds;  one-half  of  them  being  females  are  "nubiles"  (1,030  of 
them),  and  have  gone  upon  the  breeding  grounds,  never  to  be  on  the 
hauling  grounds  again,  with  the  young  males. 

The  foregoing  table,  showing  the  annual  increase  of  those  4,500 
yearling  cows  if  not  disturbed  by  man  on  the  islands  and  in  the  sea, 
declares  the  fact  that  from  1896  to  1909  that  that  single  killing  of 
4,500  yearling  cows  in  1896,  in  violation  of  the  Carlisle  rules,  actually 
caused  the  loss  of  20,225  adult  female  seals  and  20,000  2-year-old 
male  seals  from  the  herd's  total  life. 

Upon  this  basis  of  fact/,  in  calculating  the  actual  loss  to  the  Public 
Treasury  from  the  effect  of  taking  60,000  yearling  cows  from  the 
Pribilof  Island  seal  herd  between  1890-1909,  in  criminal  trespass  by 
the  lessees,  it  appears  that — 

I.  That  that  killing  of  60,000  yearling  cows  has  had  the  full  effect 
of  taking  200,000  choice  2-year-old  male  seals  from  the  Pribilof  herd 
between  1890-1909,  and  it  has  also  destroyed  200,225  adult  breeding 
cow  seals,  or,  summed  up — 

II.  A  property  loss  of  400,000  seals;  the  value  of  their  skins  is  not 
less  than  $20,000,000,  to  say  nothing  about  the  loss  of  the  annual 
earning  capacity.     Then  Elliott  having  charged  the  killing  of  these 
youncj  yearling  seals,  males  and  females  alike,  Lembkey  declared  that 
it  could  not  be  so,  since  all  the  killing  was  done  under  his  direction  by 
the  natives,  who  never  made  any  mistake  about  the  age  of  seals  when 
they  were  killing  them.     Lembkey  testified,  January  25,  1907,  to  the 
Ways  and  Means  Committee  (MS.  Notes,  Hearing  on  Fur  Seals,  p.  58): 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  may  say,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  the  clubbers  on  the  islands  are 
expert  in  their  business  and  they  can  determine  the  weight  of  a  skin  on  a  live  seal  to 
within  a  fraction  of  a  pound. 

Mr.  GBOSVENOR.  That's  all  I  wanted  to  know. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  also  know  the  age  of  a  seal  from  his  appearance. 

The  seal  island  natives,  in  a  sworn  statement  made  to  the  agents 

of  the  House    Committee  on  Expenditures  in  the    Department  of 

Commerce,  on  St.  Pauls  Island,  July  24,  1913,  declared  that  they  not 

only  knew  seals  by  ages,  but  that  when  they  killed  them  they  knew 

21588—13 2 


18  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF   ALASKA. 

it  then,  and  that  in  1896  they  first  began  to  kill  yearling  seals  for  the 
lessees  under  the  orders  of  the  lessees  and  the  Government  agents. 
(See  Exhibit  D,  Report  Special  Agents,  House  Committee  on  Ex- 
penditures in  the  Department  of  Commerce,  Aug.  31,  1913.) 

The  following  proof  is  submitted  that  the  pups  are  born  equal  in 
number  as  to  sex,  and  that  brings  them  as  "yearlings"  onto  the 
islands  males  and  females  alike  entirely  as  to  numbers,  outward 
shape,  coats,  size,  and  weights,  as  seen  when  driven  and  killed: 

COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

Friday,  June  2,  1911. 

The  committee  this  day  met,  Hon.  John  H.  Kothermel  (chairman)  presiding. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  Mr.  Chairman,  how  do  we  know  that  yearlings  are  females  and 
males  equal  in  sex?  How  do  we  know,  when  we  kill  yearlings,  that  we  are  apt  to  kill 
as  many  females  as  males  without  examining  them?  How  do  we  prove  it?  I  prove 
it  in  this  way  first,  and  it  has  been  affirmed  even  by  this  "advisory  board."  I  said 
in  1881,  in  my  official  monograph,  that  from  my  calculations,  in  round  numbers,  a 
million  pups  are  born  every  year  on  these  islands. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  When  was  this? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  1874  that  I  prepared  it,  but  it  was  published  officially  in  1881. 
They  have  been  carefully  elaborated  by  the  Government.  That  a  million  pups  are 
born  every  year  on  these  islands,  and  of  this  million  one-half  are  males.  How  did  I 
know  that?  In  November,  1872,  I  stood  over  a  killing  of  these  pups,  which  were  then 
4£  to  5  months  old,  which  was  allowed  by  the  Treasury  Department  for  "native's 
food  "  [and  that  has  been  allowed  for  some  time  by  the  Russians],  and  just  before  these 
pups  were  departing  for  the  winter,  and  the  solitude  of  winter  was  to  come  over  the 
islands,  there  being  no  birds,  or  fish,  or  anything,  the  natives  wanted  some  choice 
food  to  hang  up,  some  meat,  and  as  the  pups  are  the  sweetest  and  most  toothsome 
seal  meat,  they  naturally  desired  pup  meat.  So  they  killed  in  the  autumn,  under  my 
eyes,  several  squads,  altogether  some  10,000  pups;  but  I  tallied  9,000  pups  between 
November  15  and  November  25,  1872,  at  St.  Pauls  village,  of  which  4.800  were  males. 
The  "advisory  board,"  represented  by  Mr.  F.  A.  Lucas,  in  1897,  addressed  me  a  note 
saying: 

"DEAR  MR.  ELLIOTT:  Can  you  give  me  the  exact  number  of  pups  you  counted  for 
sex  and  the  proportion  of  males  and  females?    Looking  over  my  own  notes  im ' 
me  wish  to  quote  you  exactly. 

"F.  A.  LUCAS." 

I  sent  him  this  memorandum : 

[Memorandum  for  Lucas.] 

"Nine  thousand  pups  driven  November  15-25,  1872,  1,670  tallied  by  myself, 
of  which  were  males;  the  rest  tallied  by  Church;  average  weight  39  pounds;  som< 
as  high  as  50  pounds  and  some  as  low  as  28  pounds." 

Then  I  received  another  note  from  Mr.  Lucas,  as  follows: 

"DEAR  MR.  ELLIOTT:  Your  figures  on  pups  came  in  finely  and  make  it  certain  that 
there  is  a  small  preponderance  of  males;  our  figures  were,  males,  388;  females,  362 — 
a  total  of  750,  not  far  from  yours. 

"F.  A.  LUCAS.' 

That  was  a  pretty  close  tally;  you  see  I  was  right,  and  that  I  knew  what  I  was  aboul 

1  also  penned  this  memorandum,  which  was  made  on  that  pup-weighing  day: 

"ST.  PAUL  ISLAND,  BERING  SEA, 

"November  20,  1872. 

"A  pup.  average  weight  of  4,800  fur-seal  pups,  as  tallied  November  20,  1872,  deter 
mined  on  the  killing  grounds,  average  gross  weight  39  pounds,  thus:  Clean  ski 

2  pounds  11  ounces;  all  the  blubber,  14  pounds;  tendons,  flesh,  and  flippers, 
pounds  and  5  ounces;  bones  and  intestines,  7  pounds  and  8  ounces — a  total  of 
pounds  and  8  ounces — ; 

Or  a  weight  of  practically  39  pounds  for  a  pup  that  was  4£  to  5  months  old.     (He* 
ing  No.  1,  pp.  25,  26.) 


EXHIBIT  II.  AN  EXHIBIT  OF  THE  FACTS  WHICH  SHOW  US 
THE  SOLE  FIRST  CAUSE  OF  THAT  COMMERCIAL  RUIN  OF 
OUR  FUR-SEAL  HERD  WHICH  WE  NOW  OBSERVE  ON  THE 
PRIBILOF  ISLANDS, 

If  it  were  not  for  these  records  elaborately  and  systematically  made 
on  those  desolate  hauling  grounds,  which  I  published  in  1874  and  1890, 
it  would  be  fairly  impossible  to  get  an  adequate  idea  of  what  an  im- 
mense herd  of  fur  seals  was  in  existence  at  the  time  and  when  we  took 
possession  of  Alaska  in  1867. 

Then,  \vhen  that  idea  is  grasped,  and  it  is  made  clear  that  ever  since 
1857,  up  to  the  hour  of  1867  when  the  herd  became  ours,  this  wild 
life  had  remained  at  about  a  steady  annual  number  of  4,700,000  seals 
of  all  classes,  wre  ask,  What  have  we  done  to  reduce  it,  so  by  this  year 
of  1913,  all  that  we  find  surviving  of  it  are  only  190,555  seals  of  all 
classes  ? 

Why  did  we  lose  this  herd,  when  the  Russians  easily  kept  it  from 
1857  to  1867  in  that  fine  form  and  number  ? 

The  answer  is  made  easy  in  the  light  of  the  following  facts : 

L  It  is  a  fact  of  indisputable  record,  that  the  Russians  never  killed 

or  disturbed  the  female  seals  on  the  rookeries  of  St.  Paul  and  St. 
George  Island,  from  start  to  finish  of  their  possession  of  them. 

II.  It  is  a  fact  of  indisputable  record,  that  from  1786-87  up  to  1800 
the  Russians  annually  took  from  120,000  to  60,000  young  male,  and 
yearling  seals  from  these  hauling  grounds;  and  during  all  that  time 
never  took  any  seals  at  sea,  nor  were  these  seals  taken  at  sea  by  any 
other  people  save  the  few  annually  secured  by  the  northwest  coast 
Indians. 

TTT.  It  is  a  fact  of  indisputable  record  that  the  Russians,  beginning 
in  1800  with  an  annual  catch  of  40,000  young  male  seals  and  year- 
lings, by  1817  had  the  greatest  difficulty  in  getting  that  number  then; 
and  notes  of  protest  against  the  killing  on  the  islands  were  sent  to 
Sitka  by  the  caretaker,  Kazean  Shaishnikov,  of  St.  Pauls  Island, 
urging  the  governor  of  the  R.  A.  Co.  to  rest  the  seals  from  killing  for 
a  term  of  years.  No  pelagic  sealing  was  known  to  the  Russians 
during  this  period  of  any  kind. 

TV.  It  is  a  fact  of  indisputable  record  that  while  the  protest  of 
Shaishnikov  was  noticed  favorably  by  the  governor,  yet  the  direc- 
tors of  the  R.  A.  Co.  at  St.  Petersburg  did  not  consent;  that  they 
renewed  their  orders  to  kill  and  sent  one  of  their  number,  Gen.  Yah- 
novsky,  out  from  St.  Petersburg  in  1818  to  the  seal  islands,  charged 
with  the  business  of  examining  into  the  cause  of  this  loss  of  surplus 
male  Me  on  the  islands. 

.Y..  It  is  a  fact  of  indisputable  record  that  Yahnovsky  in  1820, 
after  spending  the  entire  season  of  1819  on  the  Pribilof  hauling 
grounds  and  rookeries,  made  a  confidential,  detailed  report  which 
declared  that  this  immense  decline  in  the  life  of  the  fur-seal  herd  was 
due  entirely  to  the  annual  killing  of  all  of  the  young  male  seals  and 

19 


20  FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 

yearlings  which  the  drivers  of  the  company  could  secure;  he  urged  a 
complete  cessation  of  it  for  a  term  of  years. 

VI.  It  is  a  fact  of  indisputable  record  that  this  request  of  Gen. 
Yahnovsky  was  ignored  by  the  directors,  and  the  orders  to  get  all  of 
the  young  male  seals  and  yearlings  were  annually  renewed;  and 

VII.  It  is  a  fact  of  indisputable  record  that  at  the  end  of  the  season 
of  1834  instead  of  getting  20,000  holluschickic  they  secured  with  the 
"utmost  exertion"  only  12,000  "small"   (yearling)  seals:  and  that 
with  the  end  of  this  season's  work  the  herd  was  so  reduced  that  the 
directors  were  obliged  to  order  a  10  years'  rest  to  all  commercial  kill- 
ing on  the  islands,  which  went  into  effect  in  the  summer  of  1834,  and 
was  faithfully  enforced;  so  that  by  1844  commercial  killing  was  re- 
sumed of  a  relatively  small  number,  beginning  with  10,000  to  13,000, 
increasing  graduallv   annually  up   to   1857,  when  this  herd  yielded 
that  year  62,000  "cnoice  young  male"  seals,  and  the  herd  itself  had 
regained  its  natural  and  normal  maximum  number,  viz,  from  4,500,000 
to  5,000,000  seals  of  all  classes. 

VTTT.  It  is  a  fact  that  during  all  this  period  of  decline  and  restora- 
tion of  the  Russian  herd  from  1800  to  1857  there  was  nothing  known 
of  or  hinted  at  which  is  now  so  well  known  as  "pelagic  sealing." 

IX.  It  is  a  fact  that  when  we  took  possession  of  the  herd  we 
leased  them  to  a  corporation,  with  a  permit  to  take  annually  100,000 
young  male  seals,  or  40,000  more  every  year  than  had  been  the 
average  number  taken  by  the  Russian  management  since  1S57. 
_  X,  It  is  a  fact  of  indisputable  record  that  by  1883  our  lessees  had 
great  difficulty  in  getting  their  quota  this  year  of  100,000  "prime" 
3  and  4  year  old  skins;  that  they  began  to  scour  the  hauling  grounds 
for  them  and  increased  the  rigor  of  that  search  and  driving  annually 
thereafter. 

X]L  It  is  a  fact  of  indisputable  record  that  up  to  this  tune  of  first 
difficulty  since  1870  of  getting  annually  100,000  fine  young  male  seals 
no  pelagic  sealing  of  the  slightest  consequence  was  in  operation 
Onlv  six  or  seven  small  vessels,  busy  for  a  few  weeks  in  the  year  off  the 
Straits  of  Fuca  and  west  coast  of  Vancouver  Island,  had  appeared  in 
the  sea  up  to  the  opening  of  the  season  of  1886. 

J,.  Therefore  in  the  light,  as  above  clearly  and  fairly  thrown  by 
these  records  of  past  experience,  we  now  know  that  the  Pribilof  here 
was  reduced  to  the  very  same  commercial  ruin  by  1834  which  we  now 
find  our  herd  reduced  to  in  1913. 

J2.  And  that  this  ruin  of  1834,  and  again  in  1913,  was  caused  by  the 
very  same  close  killing  annually  of  all  the  young  male  seals  and  year- 
lings that  could  be  secured  by  the  greedy  Russian  contractors  and  by 
our  lessees. 

Jk  And  that  the  Russians  to  save  and  restore  the  herd  were  com- 
pelled to  stop  this  excessive  and  improper  kiUing  in  1834  and  suspenc 
any  commercial  killing  on  the  islands  for  10  years  thereafter,  or  up  to 
1844-1846. 

4.  And  that  the  experiment  of  annually  taking  100,000  choice 
young  male  seals  since  1870  up  to  1890  by  our  lessees,  as  against  the 
habit  of  taking  60,000  annually  by  the  Russian  lessees,  was  a  bad 
one;  and  that  this  number  of  100,000  " surplus  male  seals"  was  an 
excessive  and  destructive  killing,  which  has  led  to  a  complete  elimi- 
nation of  the  breeding  male  life  of  the  herd,  as  we  see  it  to  day,  and 
which  policy  if  continued  will  surely  exterminate  the  species  itself. 


FUK-SEAL  HEED   OF  ALASKA.  21 

I  now  reach  in  due  order  a  very  serious  question  which  involves  the 
intelligence  and  the  honor  of  Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan,  who,  as  the 
chairman  of  the  commission  of  1896-7,  visited  the  seal  islands  and 
reported  to  the  United  States  Government  upon  the  condition  of 
this  life. 

In  this  report  Dr.  Jordan  has  deliberately  falsified  the  authentic 
Russian  records,  which  declared  to  him  as  they  declare  to  us  the 
fact  that  female  seals  were  never  killed  by  the  Russian  authorities 
on  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska — never  from  start  to  finish  of  their 
regime. 

DR.    JORDAN    DELIBERATELY    FALSIFIES    THE    RUSSIAN    RECORD    IN    RE 
NOT    KILLING    FEMALE    SEALS. 

Dr.  Jordan  had  full  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  the  Russian  killing 
of  seals  from  the  time  the  old  Russian- American  Co.  took  charge 
of  the  Pribilof  herd  in  1800,  up  to  the  day  we  received  it  from  them 
in  1867,  never  permitted  the  killing  of  female  seals.  He,  with  that 
full  knowledge  in  his  possession,  after  holding  it  for  nearly  two  years, 
has  the  following  untruthful  statement  to  finally  report  under  date 
of  February  24,  1898,  relative  to  the  conduct  of  this  work  of  killing 
seals  by  the  Russian  management  of  the  herd,  to  wit: 

On  page  25,  Fur  Seal  Investigations,  Part  1,  1898,  under  head  of 
"The  company's  management/7  he  says: 

At  once,  upon  assuming  control  of  the  islands,  the  Russian -American  Co.  put  a 
stop  to  the  ruthless  slaughter  which  threatened  the  fur-seal  herds  with  destruction 
*.    They  still  continued  to  kill  males  and  females  alike.    The  injury  to  the 
herd  naturally  continued    *    *    *. 

That  Dr.  Jordan  could  make  such  a  statement  in  distinct  denial 
of  the  only  authority  which  he  has  used  and  knows,  is  hard  to 
believe,  when  on  page  222  following,  of  this  same  report  above  cited, 
part  3.  appears  the  following  translation  of  Bishop  Veniaminov's 
account  of  this  killing,  which  was  originally  published  in  St.  Peters- 
burg, 1839,  by  Von  Baer,  to  wit: 

The  taking  of  fur  seals  commences  in  the  lattf-r  days  of  September  *  *  *.  The 
eiekatchie  (bulls)  and  old  females  (i.  e.,  2  years  and  older)  having  been  removed,  the 
others  are  divided  into  small  squads,  and  are  carefully  driven  to  the  place  where 
they  are  to  be  killed,  sometimes  more  than  10  versts  distance  *  *  *.  When 
brought  to  the  killing  grounds,  they  are  rested  for  an  hour  or  more,  according  to 
circumstances,  and  then  killed  with  a  club  *  *  *.  Of  those  1  year  old,  the  males 
are  separated  from  the  females,  and  killed;  the  latter  are  driven  carefully  back  to  the 
beach. 

Here  is  the  explicit  clear-cut  statement  made  by  Veniaminor,  who, 
writing  in  1825,  after  a  season  spent  on  St.  Paul  Island,  denies  Dr. 
Jordan's  assertion  that  the  Russians  killed  male  and  female  seals 
alike,  and  that  that  killing  of  females  destroyed  the  herd. 

And  still  worse  for  Dr.  Jordan,  this  translation  quoted  was  made 
by  Leonhard  Stejneger,  one  of  Dr.  Jordan's  own  associates  on  the  seal 
islands  in  1896-97. 

There  is  but  one  conclusion  for  any  fair  mind  in  the  premises. 
That  the  Russians  did  not  kill  the  female  seals  is  positively  stated 
by  the  only  authority  who  has  been  invoked  by  Dr.  Jordan  in  the 
premises,  and  who  has  been  translated  at  length  in  Dr.  Jordan's  final 
report,  and  correctly  translated,  as  above  cited. 


22  FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 

In  this  connection  it  is  also  passing  strange  that  Dr.  Jordan  shou] 
have  gone  out  of  his  way  to  misquote  another  authority  who  has 
explicitly  denied  the  killing  of  female  seals  by  the  Russians.  On  page 
25  Jordan's  own  statement  is : 

In  1820  Yanovsky,  an  agent  of  the  imperial  Government,  after  an  inspection  of  the 
fur-seal  rookeries,  called  attention  to  the  practice  of  killing  the  young  animals  and 
leaving  only  the  adults  as  breeders.  He  writes:  "If  any  of  the  young  breeders  are 
not  killed  by  autumn  they  are  sure  to  be  killed  in  the  following  spring." 

Unfortunately  for  Dr.  Jordan,  he  has  not  quoted  Yanovsky  cor- 
rectly. He  has  deliberately  suppressed  the  fact  as  stated  by  this 
Russian  agent,  and  put  another  and  entirely  different  statement  in 
his  mouth.  Witness  the  following  correct  quotation  of  Yanovsky: 

In  his  report  No.  41,  of  the  25th  February,  1820,  Mr.  Yanovsky  in  giving  an  account 
of  his  inspection  of  the  operations  on  the  islands  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  George,  observes 
that  every  year  the  young  bachelor  seals  are  killed  and  that  only  the  cows,  seekatchie, 
and  half  siekatch  are  left  to  propagate  the  species.  It  follows  that  only  the  old  seals 
are  left,  while  if  any  of  the  bachelors  are  left  alive  in  the  autumn  they  are  sure  to  be 
killed  the  next  spring.  The  consequence  is  the  number  of  seals  obtained  diminishes 
every  year,  and  it  is  certain  that  the  species  will  in  time  become  extinct.  (Appendix 
to  case  of  United  States  Fur  Seal  Arbitration:  Letter  No.  6;  p.  58,  Mar.  15,  1821.) 

Think  of  this  deliberate,  studied  suppression  of  the  fact  that  the 
Russians  did  not  kill  the  female  seals  thus  made  by  a  "  scientist " 
like  Dr.  Jordan,  as  above.  Why  does  Dr.  Jordan  attempt  to  deceive 
his  Government  as  to  the  real  cause  of  that  Russian  decline  of  the 
herd  between  1800-1837  ?  Why,  indeed,  when  the  truth  is  so  easily 
brought  up  to  confound  him  ? 

He  stands  convicted  out  of  his  own  hand  of  having  falsified  this 
record  of  Russian  killing  so  as  to  justify  the  shame  and  ruin  of  that 
work  of  our  own  lessees,  who  are  thus  shielded  by  him  in  his  official 
report  to  our  Government  dated  February  24,  1898,  and  published 
by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  in  January,  1898,  under  title  of 
"Fur  Seal  Investigations,"  parts  1,  2,  3,  and  4,  1898. 

Why  does  Dr.  Jordan  substitute  the  word  " breeders"  for  Yanov- 
sky's  word  " bachelors "  in  his  quotation  from  that  Russian  agent? 
Because  a  " breeder"  must  be  either  a  male  or  a  female  seal  and 
"breeders"  must  be  both  male  and  female  seals — the  very  idea  that 
Yanovsky  clearly  denies — the  idea  of  killing  female  seals.  He 
denies  it  clearly  by  saying  that  the  "young  bachelors"  are  killed, 
and  they  only. 

This  substitution  of  " breeders"  for  "bachelors"  by  Jordan  is  a 
guilty  attempt  to  conceal  the  truth  as  told  by  Yanovsky,  and  plainly 
told  by  that  Russian. 

At  this  point,  and  with  special  regard  to  the  killing  of  yearling  seals, 
Dr.  Jordan,  in  1909,  when  the  charges  were  being  put  up  to  him  that 
those  young  seals  were  being  taken  in  violation  of  law  and  to  the 
injury  of  the  herd,  made  no  denial  himself,  but  urged  Secretary  Nagel 
to  send  his  own  associate  and  assistant,  George  A.  Clark,  up  to  islands 
to  investigate  and  report  upon  the  charges,  etc.  (See  Appendix  A, 
pp.  815,  816;  June  24,  1911,  House  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

In  this  connection  I  now  ask  the  committee  to  observe  the  following 
record  of  that  report  and  its  result ,  to  wit : 

On  April  26,  1909,  Henry  W.  Elliott  addressed  a  detailed  letter  of 
specific  charges  to  Secretary  Charles  Nagel,  declaring  that  the  agents 
of  the  Government,  in  collusion  with  the  lessees,  were  killing  yearling 
seals  in  open,  flagrant  violation  of  the  law  and  regulations. 


FUK-SEAL  HEKD   OF   ALASKA. 


23 


Mr.  Xagel  made  no  answer  to  Mr.  Elliott,  but  on  May  7,  1909,  he 
selected  and  appointed  George  A.  Clark  as  an  agent  of  the  department 
to  proceed  to  and  investigate  thase  charges  on  the  seal  islands  of 
Alaska  (said  Clark  being  urged  for  this  work  by  Dr.  Jordan). 

On  September  30,  1909,  Clark  filed  an  elaborate  report  and  con- 
firmed Elliott's  charges  in  re  killing  yearlings  without  any  qualifica- 
tion, thus;  and  I  contrast  it  with  that  of  his  associate,  Lembkey,  up 
there  in  1909,  who  denies  the  same,  to  wit: 


LEMBKEY.  UNDER  OATH.  DECLARES  THAT 
HE  DOES  NOT  KILL  YEARLING  SEALS — 
AND  NEVER  J 

COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES 
IN  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  COM- 
MERCE AND  LABOR.  HOUSE  OF 

REPRESENTATIVES, 
Washington.  D.  C..  Thursday. 

February  29.  1912. 

The  committee  met  at  11  o'clock  a.  m.. 
Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman)  pre- 
siding. 

Testimony  of  Walter  I.  Lembkey.  agent 
Alaska  Seal  Fisheries.  Bureau  of  Fish- 
eries. Department  of  Commerce  and 
Labor. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Our  killing  is  confined 
to  2  and  3  year  old  males  exclusively. 
The  seals  which  they  desire  to  kill  are 
dispatched  at  once  by  means  of  a  blow  on 
the  top  of  the  head  with  a  heavy  club,  and  • 
the  seal  struck  is  rendered  unconscious 
immediately,  if  not  killed  outright. 

Briefly.  Mr.  Elliott  has  accused  those 
charged' with  the  management  of  the  seal 
fisheries  with  malfeasance  in  office  in 
that— 

1.  They  have  allowed  the  killing  of 
thousands  of  yearling  seals. 

Mr.  M<GILLICUDDY.  What  do  you  call  a 
yearling  seal?  Do  you  mean  a' seal  that 
is  12  months  old  and  no  more? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  A  yearling  seal,  in  the 
island  nomenclature,  is  a  seal  which  has 
returned  to  the  islands  from  its  first 
migration. 

Mr.  McGiLLicuDDY.  It  may  be  more 
than  12  month?  old  then? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  may  be  more,  it  may 
be  a  trill*  • 

Mr.  M<  (liLLicuDDY.  How  much  more 
than  12  months  could  it  be? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  could  not  be  but  a 
little  more,  because  all  these  seals  are 
born  during  a  period  of  three  weeks,  gen- 
erally speaking,  from  the  25th  of  June  to 
the  15th  of  July.  Now,  they  return  to 
the  islands  in  a"  mass  about  the  25th  of 
July. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  If  they  were  killed  it- 
would  be  a  violation  of  law. 


BUT  CLARK,  SPECIAL  INVESTIGATOR  OF 
SECRETARY  XAGEL,  REPORTS  THE  KILL- 
ING OF  YEARLINGS  BY  LEMBKEY  AND 
LESSEES! 

The  yearlings  of  both  sexes  for  the  sea- 
son must  number  about  12,000  each. 

This  question  of  the  proportion  of  the 
sexes  surviving  to  killable  and  breeding 
age  is  a  fundamental  one.  It  could  be 
settled  in  a  very  few  seasons  by  such  regu- 
lation of  killing  for  the  quota  as  would 
limit  it  to  animals  of  3  years  of  age  and 
over,  leaving  the  2-year-olds  untouched. 
The  quota  would  then  fall  where  it  be- 
longs, on  the  3-year-olds,  and  give  a  close 
approximation  of  the  survivals  among  the 
young  males,  which  in  turn  could  be  ap- 
plied to  the  young  females.  This  was  the 
method  used  in  1896-97,  when  a  minimum 
of  6  pounds  in  weight  of  skins  prevailed. 
During  the  present  season  and  for  some 
seasons  past  a  minimum  of  5  pounds  has 
been  in  force,  the  skins  taken  ranging  in 
weight  all  the  way  from  4  to  14J  pounds, 
bringing  all  classes  of  animals  from  year- 
lings to  4-year-olds  into  the  quota, 

The  result  of  this  manner  of  killing  is 
that  we  have  no  clear  idea  from  the  quota 
of  the  number  of  younger  animals  belong- 
ing to  the  herd.  From  the  irregularity  of 
the  movements  of  the  yearlings  of  both 
sexes  and  the  2-year-old  cows,  they  can 
not  be  counted  or  otherwise  accurately 
estimated  on  the  rookeries.  (Report  of 
George  A .  Clark  to  Secretary  Charles  Xagel , 
Sept.  30,  1909  (suppressed  Nov.  17,  1909). 
See  pp.  850-851,  Appendix  A,  June  24, 
1911,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  of  Com.  &  L.) 


24  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  would;  if  the  regu- 
lations permitted  it,  however,  it  would  be 
in  accordance  with  existing  law. 

It  should  be  remembered  also  that  the 
law  does  not  prohibit  the  killing  of  any 
male  seal  over  1  year  or  12  months  of  age, 
although  regulations  of  the  department 
do  prohibit  the  killing  of  anything  less 
than  2  years  old,  or  those  seals  which  have 
returned  to  the  islands  from  their  second 
migration.  (Hearing  No.  9,  pp.  360,  371, 
372,  Feb.  29-Mar.  1,  1912.) 

We  now  come  to  the  point  in  Secretary  NageFs  agent's  report 
where  Mr.  Nagel  is  specifically  and  clearly  told  that  the  lessees  are 
taking  yearling  seals — are  taldng  everything  that  comes  into  the 
drives — taking  these  little  seals  just  as  Elliott  has  charged  they  were 
taken  on  April  26,  1909,  and  taking  them  in  open,  flagrant  violation 
of  the  law  and  regulations.  The  following  description  of  that  illegal 
and  injurious  slaughter  is  given  to  Mr.  Nagel,  September  30,  1909, 
and  Mr.  Secretary  Nagel  shut  his  eyes  to  it,  and  presumed  to  deny  it 
to  the  Senate  and  House  committees,  February  4  and  May  31,  1911, 
to  wit: 

July  23. — Attended  the  killing  at  Northeast  Point  and  looked  over  the  rookeries 
again  after  the  drive.  There  are  5  harems  to-day  on  the  west  side  of  Sea  Lion  Neck 
where  only  3  were  found  on  the  14th. 

******* 

The  killing  at  the  point  this  morning  yielded  475  skins.  The  total  number  of 
animals  driven  was  712.  Of  these,  136  were  shaved  heads;  48  were  rejected  because 
too  big,  53  because  too  little.  Out  of  the  712  animals,  therefore,  only  53,  or  1\  per 
cent,  are  available  for  next  year's  quota. 

With  this  may  be  compared  a  killing  made  at  Northeast  Point  in  1897.  The  total 
number  killed  was  1,322.  The  full  drive  numbered  3,869.  There  were  no  shaved 
heads.  Of  the  2,547  exempted  from  killing,  500  were  too  large,  2,047  too  small.  The 
2,047  small  seals,  or  55  per  cent  of  the  whole  drive,  were  left  for  the  quota  of  1898. 
Contrast  with  this  the  7£  per  cent  left  for  the  quota  of  1910. 

A  killing  was  made  at  Halfway  Point  as  usual  on  the  return  trip.  It  yielded  32  skins. 
Fifteen  animals — young  bulls — too  large  for  killing  and  9  shaved  heads  were  exempted, 
but  no  small  seals  whatever.  As  the  end  of  the  killing  season  approaches  it  is  plain 
that  no  seal  is  really  too  small  to  be  killed.  Skins  of  less  than  5  pounds  weight  are 
taken  and  also  skins  of  8  and  9  pounds.  These  latter  are  plainly  animals  which  escaped 
the  killing  of  last  year  because  their  heads  were  shaved.  Otherwise  it  does  not  seem 
clear  how  they  did  escape. 

July  24. — A  killing  was  made  this  morning  from  Reef  and  Lukanin.  Tolstoi  has 
ceased  to  yield  any  bachelors.  The  killing  yielded  685  skins;  135  shaved  heads 
were  turned  back.  The  total  number  of  animals  driven  was  941.  Of  the  remaining 
exemptions,  81  were  too  big  for  killing,  40  too  little.  In  short,  only  slightly  over 
4  per  cent  of  the  animals  driven  were  left  for  the  quota  of  1910.  The  actual  percent- 
age killed  was  72.  If  we  add  the  number  of  killable  size  marked  for  breeding  reserve, 
135,  the  percentage  of  killable  seals  in  this  drive  rises  to  87  per  cent.  In  a  drive  made 
from  these  same  rookeries  on  this  date  in  1897  the  percentage  of  killable  seals  was  23. 
(Report  of  Geo.  A.  Clark,  Sept.  30,  1909;  Appendix  A,  pp.  887-888;  House  Com- 
mittee on  Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  June  24,  1911.) 

Then  again,  this  same  agent  of  Secretary  Nagel,  and  expert,  as 
above  cited,  George  A.  Clark  (also  Dr.  Jordan's  assistant),  says  in  a 
letter  to  W.  T.  Hornaday,  dated  August  26,  1911,  that  the  lessees 
killed  yearlings  in  1909,  and  " defends"  the  act.  He  sends  a  copy 
to  the  Hon.  J.  H.  Rothermel,  and  asks  that  it  be  "brought  to  the 
attention  of  your  committee,"  under  date  of  August  28,  1911.  In 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA.  25 

it  occur  the  following  statements  in  re  killing  yearling  seals  (1909), 
to  wit : 

Aside  from  this  I  approved  rather  than  objected  to  the  close  killing  *  *  *  in 
1909.  It  was  a  wise  business  policy  in  that  season  and  in  the  seasons  immediately 
preceding  and  following  to  take  every  possible  male  on  which  the  North  American 
( Jommercial  ( '<>.  would  pay  the  tax  of  $10,  and  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  lessees 
paid  this  tax  on  every  animal  taken  by  them  whether  yearling  or  3-year-old. 

I  criticized  the  close  killing  of  the  season  of  1909  on  two  specific  grounds.  First, 
that  it  is  economically  wasteful  to  kill  at  2  or  1  year  old  an  animal  which  at  3  will 
produce  a  larger  and  a  better  skin.  Second,  that  the  lapping  of  the  quota  over  the  3- 
y ear-olds  tended  to  obscure  an  important  scientific  fact  in  the  life  of  the  herd  which 
ought  to  be  solved,  and  which  I  had  hoped  to  throw  some  light  upon.  I  objected  to 
the  killing  of  the  younger  seals  upon  these  grounds  only,  and  recommended  that 
the  killing  be  confined  to  the  age  of  3  years. 

Thi-;  shows  that  the  killing  of  yearlings  which  Secretary  Nagel 
denies  in  his  letter  to  Senator  Wesley  L.  Jones,  February  23,  1911,  was 
well  known  to  and  stated  to  Xagel  by  his  own  special  investigator, 
George  A.  Clark,  who  was  sent  by  him  hi  1909  to  report  upon  this 
killing,  and  who  did  so  report  under  date  of  September  30,  1909; 
his  report  appears  to  have  been  suppressed  by  Bowers  (with  Nagel's 
consent),  and  as  stated  on  pages  82-84,  Report  of  Elliott  and  Gal- 
lagher, agents  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  (Aug.  31,  1913). 

IX  PROOF  OF  THE  FACT  THAT  THE  LAND  KILLING  BY  THE  LESSEES  HAS 
BEEX  INJURIOUS  AND  WITHOUT  PROPER  RESTRAINT,  THE  FOLLOW- 
ING RECORD  IS  MADE,  TO  WIT  (BY  SECRETARY  NAGEL's  OWN  SPECIAL 
AGENT,  SEPT.  30,  1909) : 

In  1896,  Dr.  Jordan  and  his  assistant,  George  A.  Clark,  made  an 
elaborate  denial  of  the  charge  that  excessive  killing  or  too  close 
killing  of  the  young  male  seals  had  injured  and  if  continued  would 
exterminate  the  herd.  (Pp.  33-36,  Report,  1896:  Treasury  Doc., 
1913.)  In  this  argument  they  united  in  saying: 

In  all  these  regards  (i.  e..  as  to  killing  seals)  the  interests  of  the  lessees  of  the  islands 
must  be  identical  with  those  of  the  herd  itself  and  therefore  with  those  of  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States. 

George  A.  Clark,  sent  up  in  1909  by  Secretary  Charles  Xagel,  and 
at  Dr.  Jordan's  urgent  request,  to  make  an  investigation  into  the 
condition  of  the  herd,  after  the  effect  of  13  years'  killing  by  the 
lessees  as  Licensed  in  1896,  by  Dr.  Jordan,  has  this  to  say,  as  against 
the  above,  anent  the  interests  of  the  lessees.  (Report,  1909:  Ap- 
pendix A,  p.  854.) 

The  history  of  the  killing  field  since  1900  strongly  suggests  the  wisdom  of  reserving 
to  the  Government  in  the  future  more  complete  control  of  work  of  taking  the 
quota.  The  interests  of  the  lessees  and  those  of  the  herd  are  by  no  means  identical, 
and  the  latter  are  paramount. 

It  is  on  the  killing  field,  however,  that  the  great  need  of  a  guiding  and  controlling 
hand  is  shown.  In  1896-97  the  Government  agents  ordered  the  drives.  This  season 
they  have  been  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  lessees.  The  young  males  set  aside  for 
breeding  purposes  having  been  marked,  the  lessees  have  been  free  to  take  what  they 
could  get.  and  this  resulted  in  their  taking  practically  all  of  the  bachelors  appearing 
on  the  hauling  grounds. 

******* 

A  diminiabed  breeding  reserve  has  therefore  been  possible.  But  we  must  consider 
a  reversed  condition  of  things,  if  pelagic  sealing  is  to  be  done  away  with.  The  herd 
will  then  begin  to  grow.  It  will  require  a  constantly  increasing  reserve  of  breeding 


26  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

males,  which  must  be  saved  from  the  killing  fields.  A  leasing  company  will  be  just 
as  eager  to  get  all  possible  skins  and  will  press  the  product  of  the  hauling  grounds, 
rising  all  too  slowly,  to  its  limit  unless  restrained. 

With  a  fixed  legal  quota,  and  a  limited  time  in  which  to  secure  it  from  a 
failing  herd,  there  naturally  results  close,  severe  driving.  In  the  eagerness  to  see  that 
no  possible  bachelor  escapes,  the  edges  of  the  rookies  are  encroached  upon  and  cows 
included  in  the  drives.  Fifty  of  them  appeared  in  drives  toward  the  close  of  this 
season.  A  drive  that  can  not  be  made  without  including  cows  should  be  omitted. 
A  drive  which  appears  on  the  killing  field  with  15  to  20  cows  in  it  should  be  released 
rather  than  incur  the  danger  of  clubbing  any  such  cow  by  mistake.  There  should  be 
some  one  in  charge  of  the  herd  with  power  and  discretion  to  do  this.  With  a  limited 
killing  season,  however,  this  would  be  unfair  to  the  lessees.  There  should  also  be 
power  and  discretion  to  waive  the  limit  and  extend  the  time  of  killing  if  necessary. 

There  has  been  on  the  killing  grounds  since  1900  a  constant  struggle  on  the  part  of 
the  leasing  company  in  the  closing  years  of  its  concession  to  get  every  possible  skin 
from  the  declining  herd.  Its  work  has  been  aided  by  a  high  arbitrary  legal  quota  and 
by  a  lowered  minimum  weight  of  skin,  enabling  it  to  gradually  anticipate  the  quotas 
of  succeeding  years  by  killing  younger  animals.  As  a  result  there  has  occurred  in 
these  years  probably  the  closest  killing  to  which  the  herd  has  ever  been  subjected. 
Aside  "from  the  diminished  supply  of  male  life  on  the  breeding  grounds  'in  1904,  this 
is  shown  in  the  fact  that  though  the  herd  has  declined  two-thirds  in  size,  the  quota  has 
never  fallen  more  than  one-third  in  size  as  compared  with  that  of  1897. 

Opposed  to  this  struggle  of  the  lessees  has  been  the  counter  struggle  of  the  Govern- 
ment's representatives  to  rescue  a  breeding  reserve.  Fortunately  it  has  been  suc- 
cessful. 

The  yearlings  of  both  sexes  for  the  season  must  number  about  12,000  each. 

This  question  of  the  proportion  of  the  sexec-  surviving  to  killable  and  breeding  age 
is  a  fundamental  one.  During  the  present  season  and  for  some  seasons  past 

a  minimum  of  5  pounds  has  been  in  force  and  skins  taken  ranging  in  weight  all  the 
way  from  4  to  144  pounds,  bringing  all  classes  of  animals  from  yearlings  to  4-year-olds 
into  the  quota. 

The  result  of  this  manner  of  killing  is  that  we  have  no  clear  idea  from  the  quota  of 
the  number  of  younger  animals  belonging  to  the  herd.  From  the  irregularity  of  the 
movements  oi  the  yearlings  of  both  sexes,  and  the  2-year-old  cows,  they  can  not  be 
counted  or  otherwise  accurately  estimated  on  the  rookeries.  (Report  of  the  special 
investigation  ordered  by  Charles  Nagel,  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor;  filed  Sept. 
30,  1909,  by  Geo.  A.  Clark,  pp.  850-851,  866,  Appendix  A,  June  21,  1911.  House  Com. 
Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.} 

For  this  change  in  1909,  from  serving  the  lessees  in  1896,  Clark's 
report  was  suppressed,  and  edited  by  the  lessees'  men,  Bowers  and 
Lembkey,  thus,  November  17,  1909: 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR. 

BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 

Washington.  November  17,  1909. 
Mr.  W.  I.  LEMBKEY, 

Bureau  of  Fisheries,  Washington,  D.  C. 

SIR:  Assuming  that  you  have  read  and  carefully  considered  the  fur-seal  report 
recently  made  by  Mr.  George  A.  Clark,  who  visited  the  islands  during  the  past  summer, 
I  desire  that  you  prepare  a -statement  of  your  views  regarding  the  report,  particularly 
with  reference  to  such  data  and  conclusions  contained  therein  as  do  not  agree  with 
your  understanding  of  the  facts  and  conditions. 

Kindly  let  me  have  this  statement  in  form  convenient  for  use  at  the  conference  of 
the  advisory  board  next  Tuesday. 

Respectfully,  GEO.  M.  BOWERS. 

Commissioner. 

This  baneful  result  of  Dr.  Jordan's  work  in  1896-97,  which  was  to 
assert  positively  that  no  killing  by  the  lessees  had  been  at  fault  or 
was  the  cause  of  the  decline  of  the  fur-seal  herd  or  would  be,  is  thus 
squarely  admitted  by  his  own  man,  in  1909 — this  man,  Geo.  A. 
Clark. 

Leading  up  to  this  killing  without  any  restraint  (as  stated  truly 
by  Clark)  in  1896,  and  continued  to  1909,  by  the  lessees,  is  the  fol- 
lowing inside  light  on  the  cause  and  warrant  which  permitted  that 


FUR-SEAL   HERD    OF   ALASKA.  2? 

illegal  work  to  be  eagerly  and  energetically  prosecuted  by  both, 
lessees  and  agents  of  the  Government  concerned,  to  wit: 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  September  25,  1900. 

It  is  understood  in  this  year's  catch  there  is  a  much  larger  number  than  usual  of 
2-year-olds;  the  officials  are  very  anxious  that  the  young  males  in  the  herd  should, 
be  weeded  out  as  closely  as  possible,  and  as  has  been  stated.  The  depart- 

ment would  be  glad  if  a  way  could  be  found  to  induce  the  lessees  to  kill  a  considerable 
number  of  the  5-year-old  bulls.  (Fur  Trade  Review:  New  York  City,  October, 
1900,  p.  513.) 

This  utterly  absurd  and  untruthful  statement  being  made  to  con- 
ceal the  truth  that  during  this  very  season  of  1900,  there  were  so  few 
2-year-olds  and  3-year-olds,  and  still  fewer  4-year-olds,  with  no 
5-year-olds  left,  that  the  lessees  had  issued  orders  to  get  every  year- 
ling seal  that  hauled  out,  every  one  save  the  "runts"  (i.  e.,  the 
"Ex.  Kx.  Sin.  Pups"). 

Then,  to  soberly  and  boldly  come  into  the  presence  of  the  House 
committee,  and  swear  that  no  yearlings  had  ever  been  killed,  from 
May  31,  1911,  until  the  truth  had  been  forced  out  of  them  April  13,, 
1912,  was  the  business  of  Secretary  Charles  Nagel  and  his  entire 
staff  of  fur-seal  officials  and  ''experts." 

PROOF   OF   GUILTY   KNOWLEDGE    OF   UNLAWFUL   TAKING   OF   YEARLING 
SEALSKINS,   1896-1912. 

That  Charles  Nagel,  Geo.  M.  Bowers,  Barton  W.  Evermann,  Dr, 
David  Starr  Jordan,  Geo.  A.  Clark,  and  the  entire  fur-seal  service 
under  their  control  had  full  and  authoritative  knowledge  of  the  real 
weights  of  one,  two,  three,  four,  five,  and  six  year  old  sealskins 
when  fresh  removed  and  properly  skinned  for  salt  curing,  is  well  proven 
by  the  following  facts  of  official  record  in  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce and  Labor,  when  they  prosecuted  and  directed  the  killing  of  fur 
seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  during  the  seasons  of  1909,  1910,  1911> 
1912,  and  1913,  to  wit: 

I.  On  April  17,  1874,  Congress  passed  an  act,  which  was  approved 
on  the  22d  following,  entitled  "An  act  to  enable  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  to  gather  authentic  information  in  regard  to  the  condition 
of  the  fur-seal  herd  of  Alaska,  and  for  other  purposes,"  etc. 

II.  In  obedience  to  the  order  of  this  act  the  Secretary  appointed 
and  instructed  a  special  agent  charged  with  that  duty;  his  report  was 
rendered  to  the  Secretary  November  16  following,  and  the  Secretary, 
in  June,   1875,  published  it  as  the  accepted  and  fully  established 
authority  on  all  questions  regarding  the  fur-seal  herd  and  the  con- 
duct of  the  public  business  on  the  seal   islands   of  Alaska.     This 
official  publication  is  entitled  "A  Report  Upon  the  Condition  of  Af- 
fairs in  the  Territory  of  Alaska:  November  16,  1874.     8vo.     pp.  277. 
Washington.     Government  Printing  Office.     1875.     By  Henry  W. 
Elliott,  special  agent  Treasury  Department." 

This  was  printed,  and  bound  in  cloth  beards,  and  distributed  by 
the  department  to  all  of  its  customs  agents  on  the  Pacific  coast  and  in 
Alaska,  on  the  seal  islands,  and  very  generally  to  the  customs  agents, 
of  the  department  in  Washington,  T>.  C.,  New  England,  New  York,  and 

T)       1  ,   •  O  7  O  ^ 

Baltimore. 


28 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


III.  On  page  150  of  this  publication  is  the  following  table  of  the 
measurements  and  weights  of  fur  seals,  one,  two,  three,  four,  five,  and 
six  years  old,  and  of  their  skins  when  removed  from  their  bodies: 

Table  showing  the  weight,  size,  and  f/rowth  of  the  fur  seal  (Callorhinus  ursinus),  from  the 
pup  to  the  adult,  male  and  female. 


Age. 

Length. 

Girth. 

Gross 
weight  of 
body. 

Weight 
of  skin. 

Remarks. 

1  week 

Inches. 
12-14 

Inches. 
10-10$ 

Pounds. 
6-7$ 

Pounds. 
li 

A  male  and  female,  being  the  only  ones  of  the 

6  months 

24 

25 

39 

3 

class  handled,  June  20,  1873. 
A  mean  of  10  examples,  males  and  females, 

1  year  

38 

25 

39 

4J 

alike  in  size,  Nov.  28,  1872. 
A  mean  of  6  examples,  males  and  females, 

2  years 

45 

30 

58 

5* 

alike  in  size,  July  14,  1873. 
A  mean  of  30  examples,  all  males,  July  24,1873. 

3  years  

52 

36 

87 

7 

A  mean  of  32  examples,all  males,  July  24,  1873. 

4  years  .  .  . 

58 

42 

135 

12 

A  mean  of  10  examples,all  males,  July  24,  1873. 

5  years 

65 

52 

200 

16 

A  mean  of  5  examples,  all  males,  July  24,  1873. 

6  years  

72 

64 

280 

25 

A  mean  of  3  examples,  all  males,  July  24,  1873. 

8  to  20  years  

75-80 

70-75 

400-500 

45-50 

An  estimate  only,  calculating  on  their  weight 
when  fat,  and  early  in  the  season. 

On  May  31,  1911,  Mr.  Henry  W.  Elliott  made  the  following  sworn 
statement  to  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  the  Department 
of  Commerce  and  Labor  (Hearing  No.  1,  pp.  12,  13,  House  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  &  Labor),  to  wit  (Secretary  Nagel  was  present) : 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  want  the  committee  to  understand  the  part  which  was  taken  by 
the  lessees  in  1872,  with  the  Treasury  agents,  of  whom  I  was  one.  in  fixing  an  official 
standard  whereby  we  could  recognize  every  seal  officially  reported  to  the  Treasury 
Department  as  it  was  sold  in  London,  because  the  London  classifications  were  dif- 
ferent from  ours  as  to  phraseology. 

The  London  people  knew  nothing  and  still  know  nothing  about  the  age  of  seals, 
and  they  cared  nothing  about  it.  They  were  interested  in  the  size  and  the  quality. 
They  ascertained  and  formed  their  idea  of  the  skin's  value  primarily  by  its  measure- 
ment, and,  secondly,  by  its  weight.  The  weight  would  vary.  "Sometimes  more 
salt  and  blubber  are  used,  and  sometimes  less.  But  the  measurements  were  reason- 
ably steady  and  constant.  They  measure  their  sealskins.  We  weighed  ours  on  the 
islands.  To  reconcile  those  differences,  it  became  very  important  in  1872  to  know 
exactly  what  we  were  doing  on  the  islands,  so  that  we  would  understand  exactly  what 
they  were  doing  in  London  when  the}  sold  them.  I  want  the  committee  to  fix  this 
in  their  minds,  because  the  whole  thing  turns  on  this  proposition.  I  said  to  the 
superintendent,  ''Why  do  you  kill  all  those  big  seals?  Do  they  ask  you  to  kill  all 
the  big  seals  and  let  all  these  smaller  seals  go?  Why  don't  you  take  them  all?  "  He 
said,  "They  do  not  want  them.  They  want  those  large  seals.  They  call  them  'mid- 
dlings' and  'smalls,'  etc."  Then  I  said,  "Can  we  not  have  some  arrangement  made 
whereby  we  can  avoid  this  culling  of  the  herd?  Don't  you  see.  Dr.  Mclntyre,  in  a  short 
time,  if  this  is  kept  up,  that  no  good  male  seal  will  ever  get  past  your  firing  line  to 
go  onto  the  breeding  rookeries?"  He  said,  "Oh,  yes,  Brother  Elliott,  but  just  look 
at  them  out  there — millions  of  them.  You  do  not  need  to  worry  about  that." 

Well,  I  admitted  that  there  was  no  need  to  worry  then,  but  I  said  to  my  associ- 
ates: "Gentlemen,  we  have  got  to  have  some  understanding  when  we  officially  report 
to  our  Government  what  the  grades  of  these  seals  are  which  the  lessees  are  killing, 
80  we  can  trace  the  record  of  their  work  from  the  islands  to  London  and  back  again. 
Let  us  get  together  now  and  form  a  complete  agreement  as  to  what  constitutes  the 
skin  of  a  'yearling'  seal,  the  skin  of  a  '2-year-old,'  and  a  '3-year-old,'  and  a  '4-year- 
old,  a  '5-year-old,'  and  so  on."  We  worked  over  that  thing  through  the  whole  sea- 
son of  1872.  That  was  something  that  these  men  took  hold  of  with  a  great  deal  of 
pleasure.  WTe  renewed  this  discussion,  comparison,  and  study  on  the  skin  weights, 
ages,  etc..  of  the  seals  in  1873.  Mr.  Mclntyre  went  to  London  and  got  the  weights 
and  measurements  of  a  set  of  skins,  which  he  took  over  as  samples,  of  1,  2,  3,  4,  and 
5  year  olds.  He  brought  them  back  to  us  with  the  stamp  on  them  as  "small  pups," 
and  so  on.  So  there  was  no  doubt  of  what  we  were  doing.  Officially,  we  had  no 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA.  29 

bu.-une.-s  with  the  sale  or  nomenclature  of  the  skins  in  London.  So,  therefore,  we 
eliminated  that  from  our  report,  and  we  spoke  of  the  settled  standard  on  the  islands; 
that  they  killed  "prime,"  or  "short"  skins  or  "7-pound"  or  "6-pound"  skins,  as 
the  case  might  be.  We  never  alluded  to  them  as  being  "middlings"  or  "smalls." 
We  prepared  a  table,  which  you  will  find  on  page  81  of  Special  Bulletin  No.  176  of 
the  United  States  Fish  Commission.  That  is  the  official  publication  which  was  agreed 
upon  by  the  four  Treasury  agents  with  whom  I  was  associated,  the  seven  agents  of 
the  lessees  (who  were  very  much  interested,  indeed,  in  what  we  agreed  upon),  and 
a  special  commissioner  of  the  United  States,  Lieut.  Commander  Washburn  Maynard, 
United  States  Xavy.  who  was  with  me  in  1874.  In  that  table  you  will  find  that  a 
"yearling"  seal  weighs  4£  pounds. 

'Mr.  TOWNSEND.  You  mean  the  pelt  or  hide? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes;  with  a  small  amount  of  blubber  which  is  attached,  varying  all 
the  way  from  a  quarter  of  a  pound  to  a  pound,  as  the  agent  orders  it  "loaded." 

In  1882  the  elaborated  and  final  notes  of  Mr.  Elliott's  work  of  1874, 
published  by  the  Department  of  the  Treasury  in  1875,  were  again 
repu Wished  by  order  of  the  Government  in  Volume  VIII,  Tenth 
Census,  United  States  of  America,  and  in  Special  Bulletin  No.  176, 
The  original  table,  as  above,  of  1874-75  publicationis  on  page  46. 
Then  on  page  81  appears  the  elaboration  of  those  grades  of  fur  which 
belong  to  the  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  and  6  year  old  skins,  as  follows,  to  wit: 

GRADATION    OF   THE    FUR    OF    CALLORHINUS    URSINUS. 

The  gradation  of  the  fur  of  Callorhinus  may,  perhaps,  be  best  presented  in  the 
following  manner: 

One-year-old  male,  well  grown,  at  July  1  of  every  season:  Fur  fully  developed  as  to 
uniform  length  and  thickness  and  evenness  of  distribution;  it  is  lighter  in  color  and 
softer  in  texture  than  hereafter  during  the  life  of  the  animal;  average  weight  of  skin 
as  removed  by  the  sealers  from  the  carcass,  4$  pounds. 

Two-year-old  male,  well  grown,  at  June  1  of  every  season:  Fur  fully  developed  as 
to  even*  length  and  thickness  and  uniformity  of  distribution;  it  has  now  attained  the 
darker  buff  and  fawn  color,  sometimes  almost  brown,  which  it  retains  throughout  the 
rest  of  the  life  of  the  animal;  it  is  slightly  and  perceptibly  firmer  and  stiff er  than  it 
was  last  year,  not  being  at  all  "fluffy"  as  in  the  yearling  dress  now;  average  weight  of 
skin  as  taken  from  the  body,  5£  pounds. 

Three-year-old  male,  well  grown,  at  June  1  of  every  season:  Fur  fully  developed  as 
to  even  length,  but  a  shade  longer  over  the  shoulders,  where  the  incipient  "wig"  is 
forming;  otherwise  perfectly  uniform  in  thickness  and  even  distribution;  this  is  the 
very  best  grade  of  pelt  which  the  seal  affords  during  its  life;  average  weight  of  skin, 
as  taken  from  the  body,  7  pounds. 

Four-year-old  male,  well  grown,  at  June  1  of  every  season:  Fur  fully  developed  as 
to  even  length,  except  a  decided  advance  in  length  and  perceptible  stiffness  over  the 
shoulders,  in  the  "wig";  otherwise  perfectly  uniform  in  thickness  and  even  distribu- 
tion ;  this  grade  is  almost  as  safe  to  take  and  -as  good  as  in  the  3-year-old ;  average  weight 
of  skin,  as  removed,  12  pounds. 

Five-year-old  male,  well  grown,  at  May  to  June  1  of  every  season:  Fur  fully  devel- 
oped, but  much  longer  and  decidedly  coarser  in  the  "wig"  region;  otherwise  uniform 
in  thickness  and  distribution ;  the  coarseness  of  the  fur  over  the  shoulders  and  dispro- 
portionate length  thereon  destroys  that  uniformity  necessary  for  rating  Al  in  the 
market;  in  fact,  it  does  not  pay  to  take  this  skin;  average  weight,  16  pounds. 

Six-year-old  male,  well  grown,  from  May  to  June  1  of  every  season:  Fur  fully 
developed,  still  longer  and  stiff  er  in  the  "wig"  region,  with  a  slightly  thinner  dis- 
tribution over  the  post-dorsal  region,  and  shorter;  this  skin  is  never  taken — it  is 
profitless:  average  weight,  25  pounds. 

Seven-year-old  and  upward  male,  from  May  to  June  1  of  every  season:  Fur  fully 
developed,  but  very  unevenly  distributed,  being  relatively  scant  and  short  over 
the  posterior  dorsal  region,  while  it  is  twice  as  long  and  very  coarse  in  the  covering 
to  the  shoulders  especially  and  the  neck  and  chest;  skins  are  valueless  to  the  fur 
trade;  weight,  45  to  60  pounds. 

Then  foUows,  on  page  168,  same  publication,  the  following  recapit- 
ulation of  the  above-cited  growth  and  weights  of  fur  seals. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Table  showing  the  relative  growth,  weight,  etc.,  of  the  fur  seals. 
f Compiled  from  the  field  notes  of  the  author,  made  upon  the  killing  grounds  of  St.  George  and  St.  Paul.] 


Growth  of  fair  average  example. 

1  day 
old* 

6  months, 
old. 

1  year 
old. 

2  years 
old. 

3  years 
old. 

Length:  1 
Callorhinus  ursinus  (male)  inches.  . 

12-13 

24 

38 

45 

52 

Callorhinus  ursinus  (female)    .      ...        .  do.  .  .  . 

12-13 

24 

37 

424 

48 

•Girth  immediately  behind  fore-flippers:  » 
Callorhinus  ursinus  (male)       do  .... 

9-lOJ 

25 

25 

30 

36 

Callorhinus  ursinus  (female)                      .  do 

9-10 

25 

25 

30 

34 

Weight  (avoirdupois):  « 
Callorhinus  ursinus  (male)  pounds.  . 

5-  7i 

39 

40 

58 

87 

Callorhinus  ursinus  (female)                  .      do 

5-7 

39 

39 

56 

60 

Growth  of  fair  average  example. 

4  years 
old. 

5  years 
old. 

6  years 
old. 

7  years 
old. 

8  years 
old. 

Length:  1 
Collorhinus  ursinus  (male)  inches  .  . 

58 

65 

72 

75-80 

(2) 

Collorhinus  ursinus  (female)           .          .    do 

50 

(2) 

Oirth  immediately  behind  fore-flippers:  3 
Callorhinus  ursinus  (male)        do  . 

42 

52' 

64 

70-80 

80-84 

Callorhinus  ursinus  (female)                       .do 

36 

37 

(2) 

Weight  (avoirdupois):  4 
Callorhinus  ursinus  (male)  pounds  .  . 

135 

200 

280-350 

400-500 

500-600 

Callorhinus  ursinus  (female)  do  

62 

75 

(2) 

1  Direct  from  tip  of  nose  to  root  of  tail. 

2  Ceases. 

s  Eight  year  old  citation  an  estimate  only. 

4  Seven  and  8  year  estimates  are  not  based  upon  actual  weights;  an  opinion  merely. 

NOTE. — All  fur  seals,  from  yearlings  to  puberty,  are  termed  "bachelors,"  or  "holluschickie,"  and  all 
taale  fur  seals  from  the  age  of  5  years  on  are  termed  ("virile")  bulls,  or  "seacatchie."  All  female 
fur  seals  from  1  year  and  upward  are  termed  "cows,"  or  "matkamie"  ("mothers").  All  the  young  under 
yearlings  are  termed  "pups,"  or  "kotiche"  ("little  cats"). 

Since  this  publication  by  the  Government  of  the  above  tables  of 
fur  seal  skin  weights  in  1875  and  1882,  there  has  been  no  other 
attempt  made  to  do  so.  There  has  been  no  witness  before  the  House 
committee  who  has  been  able  to  show  that  an  error  of  any  kind  is 
published  in  those  tables. 

The  Hitchcock  rules  of  May  1,  1904,  as  well  as  the  Carlisle  rules  of 
May  14,  1896,  were  based  upon  those  records  of  the  weights  of  fur- 
seal  skins  taken  from  seals  1,  2,  3,  4,  and  5  years  old. 

The  attempt  made  to  deny  the  accuracy  of  these  tables  by  Nagel's 
confederates,  Bowers,  Lembkey,  Evermann,  and  Lucas,  ended 
instantly  when  those  men  were  put  under  oath.  Bowers  declared  he 
did  not  know  what  a  yearling  sKin  weighed.  Lembkey  has  admitted 
its  weight  was  4^  pounds.  He  testified  as  follows : 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  taken  the  weights  on  the  island  of  all  seal  skins  weighed 
there. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  have?  I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  this,  and  the  attention  of 
the  committee.  You  say  you  have  taken  note  of  the  weights? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  testified  before  the  committee  that  every  skin  taken  on  the 
islands  except  a  few  that  inadvertently  were  omitted  were  weighed  there. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  is  the  weight  of  a  yearling  fur  seal  skin? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  weighed  very  few  yearling  skins,  but  they  would  usually  run  up 
to  4  or  4|  pounds.  (Hearing  No.  9;  p.  435,  Apr.  13,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  &  L.) 

No  other  member  of  the  advisory  board  save  Lembkey  knew  what 
a  yearling  seal  skin  weighed  or  measured,  and  all  confessed  their 
ignorance  under  oath  to  the  committee.  (See  pp.  914-919;  hearing 
No.  14,  July  25,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.,  Dept.  C.  &  L.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  31 

Therefore  when  Secretary  Straus  in  1906,  1907,  and  1908,  and 
Secretary  Nagel  were  plainly  and  clearly  advised  of  the  fact  that 
then*  agents  and  the  seal  contractors  or  lessees  were  busy  in  violating 
the  regulations  of  the  Government  on  the  seal  islands,  and  falsely 
certifying  the  illegal  catch  of  yearling  male  and  female  seals  into 
them  as  "the  skins  of  male  seals  not  under  2  years  of  age,"  it  was 
then-  sworn  duty  to  have  investigated  into  that  fraud  at  once. 

They  did  not;  they  shirked  the  responsibility;  first,  as  Mr.  Straus 
did,  and  who  threw  it  upon  an  advisory  board  of  "scientists,"  who, 
in  turn,  shamefully  failed  to  do  their  duty  hi  the  premises,  and  who 
also  found  that  Secretary  Nagel  wanted  them  to  shield  those  men 
who  had  been  guilty  of  that  criminal  trespass  upon  the  fur-seal  herd 
of  Alaska.  Having  found  this  spirit  of  Nagel,  these  scientists  weakly 
and  improperly  allowed  their  names  to  be  used  by  Nagel  as  his  justi- 
fication, or  "high  scientific"  authority  for  continuing  that  fraudulent 
killing. 

Observe  the  manner  in  which  Charles  Nagel  uses  these  "scientists" 
as  "experts"  to  justify  his  ruinous  and  illegal  slaughter  of  the  year- 
ling male  and  female  seals  annually.  When  taxed  with  this  crime, 
he  says  to  Senator  Dixon,  Chairman  Senate  Committee  on  Conserva- 
tion of  National  Resources: 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  may  proceed. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Here  is  something  that  will  interest  you,  because  politicians  and 
lawyers  have  a  regard  for  "scientists"  that  is  really  unduly  exalted.  Most  scientists 
are  not  as  wise  as  some  people  wiser  than  they  are,  seem  to  think  they  are.  Here  is 
a  letter  from  Secretary  Charles  Nagel  in  answer  to  an  inquiry  by  the  Committee  on 
( Ymservation  of  National  Resources  as  to  his  authority  for  his  work  of  killing  fur  seals 
on  the  Pribilof  Islands  in  violation  of  law  and  rules,  and  who  puts  this  killing  as  done 
squarely  upon  Jordan,  Stejneger,  Merriam,  et  al.: 

(Copy.) 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY, 
Washington,  January  14,  1911. 

MY  DEAR  SENATOR:  I  have  your  communication  of  the  12th  instant  inclosing  Sen- 
ate bill  No.  9959  to  amend  an  act  entitled  "An  act  to  protect  the  seal  fisheries  of 
Alaska,  and  for  other  purposes." 

The  essential  purpose  of  this  bill  I  take  to  be  a  suspension  of  seal  killing  for  a  period 
of  five  years  from  and  after  the  1st  day  of  May,  1911.  Since  the  hearing  before  your 
committee  last  year  I  have  had  some  occasion  to  consider  this  question  with'  the 
result  that  the  impressions  then  expressed  have,  if  anything,  been  strengthened. 

Under  existing  conditions  I  can  not  believe  that  the  seal  herds  would  be  in  any 
sense  conserved  by  suspending  the  killing  of  male  seals  in  the  manner  in  which  it  is 
now  being  done.  So  long  as  pelagic  sealing  is  continued  there  does  not  appear  to  me 
to  be  even  room  for  discussion.  I  believe  it  can  be  demonstrated  that  the  number  of 
female  seals  killed  by  the  pelagic  sealers  substantially  equals  the  number  of  male 
seals  killed  by  the  Government.  If  that  be  true,  one  and  perhaps  the  chief  argu- 
ment which  has  been  advanced  would  seem  to  be  without  foundation. 

However,  if  pelagic  sealing  were  discontinued  and  all  the  female  seals  were  abso- 
lutely protected,  I  still  believe  that  it  would  be  perfectly  safe,  and  in  a  measure 
necessary,  in  so  far  as  the  conservation  of  the  herd  is  concerned,  to  kill  a  certain  per- 
centage of  male  seals.  Of  course  my  personal  judgment  is  without  value.  I  am 
relying  upon  the  advice  of  experts  who  have  been  appointed  to  inquire  and  report 
and  who  have  given  the  department  the  benefit  of  their  opinion. 

I  gather  that  a  further  ground  has  been  assigned  for  the  discontinuance  of  seal 
killing,  namely,  that  such  discontinuance  would  be  received  by  foreign  countries 
as  proof  of  our  disinterestedness,  and  that  such  a  course  would  serve  to  promote  the 
consummation  of  treaties  to  prohibit  pelagic  sealing.  If  this  were  so,  I  should,  of 
course,  advocate  the  discontinuance,  but  I  have  no  intimation  from  the  State  Depart- 
ment that  such  a  course  on  our  part  would  have  the  slightest  bearing  upon  pending 


32  FUR-SEAL  HEED  OF   ALASKA. 

negotiations.     I  can  not  undertake  to  speak  upon  this  phase  of  the  question,  but  no 
doubt  that  information  can  be  readily  obtained  from  the  State  Department. 

I  am  glad  to  say  that  the  results  of  the  first  year's  experience  under  the  law  enacted 
la&t  year  are  now  at  hand.  Compared  with  the  amounts  received  under  the  contract 
system  the  showing  is,  I  think,  a  very  satisfactory  one.  At  the  same  time  I  would 
not  be  understood  as  saying  that  a  gain  in  the  receipt  of  a  few  hundred  thousand  dollars 
ought  to  be  conclusive  in  determining  the  Government's  policy.  On  the  contrary, 
I  am  of  the  opinion  that  the  primary  consideration  to  have  in  mind  is  one  of  conserva- 
tion, namely,  the  preservation  of  the  herds.  If  I  could  believe  that  the  policy  which 
the  Government  now  pursues  in  any  sense  endangers  the  herds  I  should  advocate 
a  change.  My  recommendation  with  respect  to  the  bill  now  pending  is  based  upon 
the  opinion  that  the  Government  is  now  killing  only  such  male  seals  as  may  be 
regarded  as  surplus,  and  that  the  preservation  of  the  herds  is  not  in  any  degree  affected 
by  this  policy. 

If  it  is  proposed  to  have  a  hearing  upon  this  bill  I  respectfully  ask  that  as  much 
notice  as  possible  be  given,  so  that  I  may  make  sure  to  have  present  those  representa- 
tives of  the  bureau  and  such  members  of  the  boards  and  commissions  as  are  more 
especially  conversant  with  the  question. 
Very  sincerely,  yours, 

(Signed)  CHARLES  XAGEL. 

Hon.  JOSEPH  M.  DIXON, 

United  States  Senate. 

(Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  914-918,  July  25,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  &  L.) 

What  did  "  those  representatives  of  the  bureau  and  such  members 
of  the  boards  and  commissions,"  when  put  under  oath  and  duly 
examined,  say  ? 

Why,  each  and  every  one  of  them,  save  Lembkey,  declared  them- 
selves totally  ignorant  of  what  the  killing  of  a  yearling  seal  meant; 
they  did  not  know  what  its  size  or  its  skin  weight  was;  they  did  not 
know  what  Bowers,  Nagel,  and  Lembkey  were  doing. 

But  Lembkey  knew — and  the  truth  was  extorted  from  this  most 
unwilling  and  shifty  and  evasive  witness  under  close,  determined 
cross-examination — Nagel  was  killing  and  had  been  killing  yearling 
seals,  females  and  males  alike,  by  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands 
in  1909-10;  yes,  until  checked  by  the  law  of  August  24,  1912,  from 
further  illegal  and  ruinous  slaughter. 

Further  proof  of  the  guilty  knowledge  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries 
and  of  the  advisory  board  on  fur-seal  service  of  the  real  and  proper 
weights  of  sealskins  when  correctly  removed  from  the  bodies  of  1, 
2,  3,  4,  5,  and  6  year  old  seals,  is  given  in  the  following  letter  written 
to  the  President  of  the  United  States  by  Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan, 
chairman  of  said  board. 

LELAND  STANFORD  JUNIOR  UNIVERSITY, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  PRESIDENT, 
Stanford  University,  Cal.,  January  16,  1906. 
Hon.  THEODORE  ROOSEVELT, 

The  White  House,  Washington,  D.  C. 

DEAR  SIR:  *  *  *  If  the  memorandum  referred  to  by  Mr.  Elliott  as  the  Hitch- 
cock rules  of  1904  be  enforced,  as  I  suppose  they  have  been,  the  matter  will  soon 
regulate  itself.  *  *  *  I  note  that  Mr.  Elliott  states  with  reference  to  the  "Hitch- 
cock rules"  that  "the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor  engaged  to  order  them" 
at  his  instance.  This  may  be  true,  but  these  rules  were  drawn  up  by  myself  in  Mr. 
Hitchcock's  office  in  1904.  They  seemed  to  me  to  represent  a  fair  conservatism,  and  it 
is  gratifying  to  find  that  for  once  I  was  in  agreement  with  Mr.  Elliott  in  a  matter  in- 
volving executive  procedure. 

*  *  *  *  *  *  * 

Very  respectfully,  yours, 

DAVID  STARR  JORDAN, 
Former  Commissioner  in  Charge  Fur  Seal  Investigations. 

(Appendix  A,  p.  331,  June  24,  1911,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  &  L.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  33 

Here  is  the  unqualified  statement  made  by  Dr.  Jordan  that  he  has 
fully  agreed  upon  a  minimum  weight  of  '45£  pounds"  for  skins  to  be 
taken  on  the  Pribilof  Islands;  that  this  order  represents  "SL  fair  con- 
servation," and  he  is  gratified  to  find  "that  for  once"  he  "was  in 
agreement  with  Mr.  Elliott"  on  this  "matter  involving  executive 
procedure." 

With  that  full  knowledge  and  great  satisfaction  on  his  part,  over 
the  fact  that  "5£  pounds"  was  a  minimum  weight  of  a  correctly 
skinned  seal's  pelt  which  could  be  safely  and  properly  taken  without 
injury  to  the  herd,  January  16,  1906,  as  above  declared,  why  did  this 
chief  authority  on  March  9,  1906,  immediately  following,  agree  to  the 
lowering  of  this  minimum  weight  to  "5  pounds"  on  that  day?  And 
that  lowering  down  done  by  his  fellow-citizen  and  neighbor,  Victor 
Metcalf,  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  who  lived  only  a  few 
miles  away  from  Palo  Alto,  at  Oakland,  Cal.! 

Why  did  he  agree  to  it  ?  And  still  more  and  worse  for  Dr.  Jordan 
and  Secretary  Charles  Xagel's  agents,  as  well  as  for  Xa^el  himself,  on 
November  23,  1909,  these  men  all  united  in  a  unanimous  recom- 
mendation that  this  improper  "5-pound"  minimum  for  seal  pelts  be 
continued  in  a  new  lease  for  the  islands  to  be  made  May  1,  1910! 

The  following  sworn  testimony  proves  it,  to  wit : 

Mr.  BOWERS.  On  November  23,  1909,  there  was  a  meeting  of  the  advisory  board 
with  the  fur-seal  board  and  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries  and  Deputy  Commissioner 
of  Fisheries  (Dr.  Hugh  M.  Smith),  at  which  were  present  also  Mr.  Chich aster  and  Mr, 
George  A.  Clark.  After  mature  deliberation  these  gentlemen  unanimously  agreed 
upon  the  following  recommendations: 

1.  It  is  recommended  that  the  agent  in  charge,  fur-seal  service,  shall,  under  the 
direction  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  have  full  power  to  limit  or  restrict 
the  killing  of  fur  seals  and  blue  foxes  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  to  any  extent  necessary 
and  that  no  specified  quota  be  indicated  in  the  lease. 

2.  It  is  recommended  that,  for  the  present,  no  fur-seal  skin  weighing  more  than  8$ 
pounds  or  less  than  5  pounds  shall  be  taken,  and  that  not  more  than  95  per  cent  of  the 
3-year-old  male  seals  be  killed  in  any  one  year.     (Hearing  No.  2,  p.  110,  July  9,  1911, 
H*.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  &  L.) 

Here  is  the  change  of  a  "fair"  and  proper  minimum  weight  of  5J 
pounds  to  one  of  ''5  pounds,"  improperly  made,  ordered  so  as  to 
facilitate  the  "loading"  of  yearling  4J-pound  skins  into  the  2-year- 
old  class  or  oj-pound  skin-. 

In  spite  (  f  all  the  protests  made  since  1906  against  this  trick  of 
regulation  «•  >iitinuing  so  as  to  permit  an  easier  criminal  trespass  by 
the  lessees  upon  the  seal  herd,  yet  in  1909,  these  men  in  charge  who 
are  public  <  flicials,  all  sworn  to  protect  and  conserve  that  fine  public 
pn  perty  on  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska,  actually  combined  with  the 
'•>.  (  n  Xoveinber  23,  and  sought  to  continue  that  public  imposi- 
tion in  a  new  lease. 

diaries  Xagel,  David  Starr  Jordan,  George  M.  Bowers,  George  A. 
Clark,  B.  W.  Evermann,  W.  I.  Lembkey,  Isaac  Liebes,  S.  B.  Elkins, 
and  D.  O.  Mills  all  had  then  guilty  knowledge  of  this  trespass  by 
them,  as  above  cited,  in  the  past,  in  the  present,  and  for  the  future, 
when  this  meeting  was  held  November  23,  1909,  in  the  city  of  Wash- 
ington, D.  C..  cffice  of  the  United  States  Commission  of  Fisheries,  and 
then  adjourned  t  >  Charles  Xagel's  office  in  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce Building  the  same  day. 

The  men  who  were  present  at  this  remarkable  meeting  and  voted 
a^  a  unit  t  >  renew  that  lease  and  public  imposition  were  David  Starr 
21588—13 3 


34  FUR-SEAL  HEED  OF  ALASKA. 

Jordan,  Leon  hard  Stejneger,  Frederic  A.  Lucas,  Edwin  A.  Sims, 
Charles  H.  Townsend,  Barton  Warren  Evermann,  Walter  I.  Lembkey, 
Millard  C.  Marsh,  George  M.  Bowers,  Hugh  M.  Smith,  H.  D.  Cliirlic's- 
ter;  and  George  A.  Clark.  (See  the  official  record  of  that  presence 
and  vote,  p.  814,  Appendix  A,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  &  L.,  June  24, 
1911.) 

Secretary  Nagel,  in  his  letter  to  Senator  Dixon  dated  January  14, 

1911,  and  before  he  issued  his  orders  through  Bowers  and  Lembkey 
to  kill  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands,  12,002  of  them  in  June  and  July 
following,  has  this  to  say  in  justification  of  that  order  for  this  killing 
of  6,247  yearling  seals,  which  followed  his  directions. 

Remember  he  had  the  specific  protest  of  April  26,  1909,  and  proof 
of  its  charge  September  30,  1909,  before  him,  against  the  work  of 
his  agents  in  1909  and  1910 — that  work  of  killing  female  and  male 
yearling  seals  in  violation  of  the  law,  and  of  the  regulations  pledged 
to  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  March  9,  1904  (the  Hitchcock 
rules).  With  those  protests  and  proof  thereof  in  his  hands,  he  stated 
to  the  Senate  committee  January  14,  1911: 

Under  existing  conditions  I  can  not  believe  that  the  seal  herds  would  be  in  any 
sense  conserved  by  suspending  the  killing  of  male  seals  in  the  manner  in  which  it  is 
now  being  done.  So  long  as  pelagic  sealing  is  continued  there  does  not  appear  to  me 
to  be  even  room  for  discussion.  I  believe  it  can  be  demonstrated  that  the  number 
of  female  seals  killed  by  the  pelagic  sealers  substantially  equals  the  number  of  male 
seals  killed  by  the  Government.  If  that  the  true,  one  and  perhaps  the  chief  argument 
which  has  been  advanced  would  seem  to  be  without  foundation. 

However,  if  pelagic  sealing  were  discontinued  and  all  the  female  seals  were  abso- 
lutely protected,  I  still  believe  that  it  would  be  perfectly  safe,  and  in  a  measure 
necessary,  in  so  far  as  the  conservation  of  the  herd  is  concerned,  to  kill  a  certain  per- 
centage of  male  seals.  Of  course  my  personal  judgment  is  without  value.  I  am 
relying  upon  the  advice  of  experts  who  have  been  appointed  to  inquire  and  report, 
and  who  have  given  the  department  the  benefit  of  their  opinion. 

Here  he  tells  the  committee  that  he  believes  in  killing  those  small 
seals  uin  the  manner  in  which  it  is  being  done." 

Then  he  declares  that  while  his  "  personal  judgment  is  without 
value,  I  am  relying  upon  the  advice  of  experts  who  have  been  ap- 
pointed to  inquire  and  report,  and  who  have  given  the  department 
the  benefit  of  their  opinion." 

When  those  " experts/7  Stejneger,  Merriam,  Townsend,  Lucas,  and 
Evermann  came  up  before  the  House  committee  in  April  and  May, 

1912,  each  and  every  one  of  them  declared  themselves  ignorant  of 
what  Nagel  had  done  with  regard  to  killing  yearling  seals.     They 
did  not  know  what  a  yearling  sealskin  was.     (See  Hearing  No.  14, 
pp.  914-919,  July  25,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  &  L.) 

When  Secretary  Nagel  in  order  to  fortify  himself  against  attack, 
called  the  "advisory  board  on  fur  seal  service"  into  session  at  Wash- 
ington, D.C.,  November  23,  1909, -and  got  from  that  body  of  "experts" 
(Jordan,  Lucas,  Townsend,  Evermann,  Bowers,  Hugh  Smith,  Stej- 
neger, Clark,  and  Lembkey)  the  "unanimous  recommendation" 
that  he  renew  the  seal  lease  and  continue  this  improper  killing  of  95 
per  cent  of  the  male  life,  it  will  be  noticed  that  Dr.  C.  Hartt  Merriam 
and  Frank  H.  Hitchcock  did  not  attend  and  join  in  that  "  unanimous" 
recommendation. 


FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA.  35 

The  reason  why  Dr.  Merriam  did  not  is  perhaps  best  stated  in  his 
testimony  on  May  4,  1912,  to  the  House  committee.  He  was  opposed 
to  the  killing  of  yearling  seals  under  any  circumstances,  to  wit: 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Then,  in  case  anyone  in  the  House  of  Representatives  has  used 
your  name  as  a  person  who  would  be  opposed  to  the  killing  on  the  islands  they  were 
wron«r  about  your  position? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  They  were  wrong.  I  have  never  taken  any  such  position.  I  have 
always  held  the  contrary.  I  have  always  stated,  since  the  first  time  I  went  there, 
that  conservative  killing  on  the  islands  was  a  benefit  to  the  herd  and  not  an  injury, 
but  I  should  not  allow  the  killing  of  yearlings  under  any  circumstances,  and  I  should 
not  kill  more  than  75  per  cent  of  the  young  on  land  at  any  one  time.  I  would  be  sure 
to  leave  more  than  enough  for  possible  contingencies.  (Hearing  No.  11,  pp.  694-695, 
May  4,  l!»lL>.  II.  Com.  Kxp.  Dept.  C.  &  L.) 

So  it  is  very  evident  that  Secretary  Nagel  did  not  take  the  advice 
of  Dr.  Merriam,  and  as  for  Mr.  Hitchcock,  his  well-known  opposition 
to  this  violation  of  the  rules  of  the  department — the  Hitchcock  rules 
of  May  1,  1904,  needs  no  further  comment  here. 

Then  why  did  Secretary  Nagel  persist  in  killing  these  yearling 
seals,  males  and  females  alike  ?  Of  7,333  of  them  in  1910  and  6,247 
of  them  in  1911? 

Because  there  was  nothing  left  that  the  agents  could  find  to  kill, 
and  this  continued  improper  killing  would  make  the  false  reports  of 
1906,  1907,  1908,  and  1909,  which  the  lessees  had  written,  "regular/7 
and  hide  the  sudden  collapse  in  killing  which  would  appear  instantly 
if  no  yearlings  were  taken  in  1910;  also  in  1911. 

That  is  why  he  persisted  in  this  criminal  trespass — to  prevent  the 
sudden  exposure  of  it  by  contrast  between  the  unlawful  killing  pf  1909 
with  a  lawful  killing  in  1910;  and  again  in  1911. 

SAMPLE  OF  THE  SCIENTIFIC  "  AUTHORITY"  QUOTED  BY  SECRETARY 
CHARLES  NAGEL,  JAN.  14,  1911,  AS  HIS  WARRANT  FOR  KILLING  7,733 
YEARLINGS  IN  1910. 

The  peculiar  and  particular  " science"  which  those  lawless  lessees 
and  their  agents  on  the  islands  and  in  Washington  had  complete 
regard  for  in  the  persons  of  Dr.  Jordan  and  his  assistants,  is  well 
exhibited  in  Dr.  Leonhard  Stejneger,  whose  remarkably  frank  testi- 
mony follows. 

Stejneger,  strangely  enough,  has  no  knowledge  of  what  the  agents 
of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  Bowers,  et  al.,  have  been  doing  as  to  illegal 
killing  of  yearling  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands,  season  of  1910.  And 
he  had  no  official  consultation  with  Bowers  or  Nagel  about  it,  he 
swears. 

Then,  in  the  next  breath,  he  declares  that  if  the  law  did  not  pre- 
vent, he  would  kill  yearlings.  In  other  words,  he  would  do  exactly 
as  Bowers  and  Nagel  did  do. 

Dr.  Stejneger  is  unfortunate  in  his  " scientific"  advice  to  those  men 
when  he  says : 

I  hold  that  you  can  kill,  in  the  months  of  June  and  July — that  is  the  season  prac- 
tically when  the  killing  is  done — in  the  season  you  can  kill  all  the  males  without 
any  detriment  to  the  herd.  I  will  say  all  the  usable  skins,  three  years  and  less;  that 
is  mv  opinion,  my  deliberate  opinion. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  But  I  understood  Prof.  Elliott  to  ask  you  whether  you  advised 
Mr.  Bowers? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  may  have  said  that  very  thing. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Kill  all  the  killable  seals? 


36  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is,  all  he  can  find. 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  With  the  limitation  if  in  season.  I  undoubtedly  advised  such  a 
thing,  and  should  advise  it  now. 

He  actually  goes  to  the  following  extreme  limit  of  license  to  destroy, 
to  wit : 

INVESTIGATION  OF  FUR-SEAL  INDUSTRY  OF  ALASKA. 

COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Saturday,  May  4,  1912. 

The  committee  met  at  10  o'clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman)  pre- 
siding. 

Present:  Messrs.  Young,  McGillicuddy,  and  McGuire. 

STATEMENT    OF   LEONHARD    STEJNEGER. 

LEONHARD  STEJNEGER,  having  been  duly  sworn,  was  examined,  and  testified  as 
follows:  l 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  whether,  of  your  own  personal  knowledge,  seals  have 
been  killed  that  were  too  small  or  too  young,  under  the  act  of  Congress? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  do  not  know,  because  I  have  not  been  on  the  island  since  1897 — 
since  1896. 

If  I  may  be  allowed  to  make  a  statement,  since  you  ask  whether  I  had  any  statement 
to  make,  the  law  is  the  law,  and  has  to  be  lived  up  to;  but  whether  seal  is  killed  as 
1-year  old  or  when  older  could  not  affect  the  seal  herd  to  any  extent  and  could  not 
hurt  it  at  all;  you  might  just  as  well  kill  1-year  olds  or  2-year  olds  or  3-year  olds.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  you  could  not  kill  as  large  a  percentage  of  1-year  olds  as  of  2  or  3  year 
olds.  The  1-year  olds  would  be  2-year  olds  the  next  year,  and  then  you  would  kill 
them  anyhow.  The  Government  would  realize  a  little  less  money  for  the  smaller 
skins.  That  would  be  the  whole  result. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Dr.  Evermann,  do  you  or  anyone  else  wish  to  ask  the  doctor  any 
questions? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  have  no  questions. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Mr.  Elliott,  do  you  want  to  ask  him  any  questions? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  only  a  few  questions  to  ask  him.  Dr.  Stejneger,  what  is  the 
length  of  a  yearling  fur  seal  of  the  Alaskan  herd? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  could  not  tell  you. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  ever  measured  one  of  the  Alaskan  herd? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  No. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  do  not  know  anything  about  the  length  of  a  skin  of  a  yearling 
seal  as  taken  from  the  body? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Of  a  yearling  seal?  I  do  not  know;  I  have  never  seen  a  yearling- 
seal  killed  on  the  American  islands. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Were  you  in  consultation  with  Mr.  Bowers  when  he  ordered  the 
killing  of  12,920  seals  on  the  seal  islands  in  1910? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Do  you  mean  in  personal  special  consultation  with  Mr.  Bowers? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  Mr.  Bowers — 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Not  outside  of  what  I  have  said  in  the  board. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No,  no.     I  asked  you,  did  Mr.  Bowers  advise  with  you? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Personally? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Not  when  he  issued  his  order  to  kill  12,920  seals  in  1910? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  do  not  quite  understand  whether  it  was  with  me  personally  or 
as  a  member  of  the  board. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Well,  as  a  member  of  the  board,  do  you  remember  any  consultation 
with  him  about  issuing  those  orders? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  No;  I  do  not  remember. 

He  makes  a  flat  statement  that  if  the  law  did  not  prevent,  he  would  kill  yearlings.    This  "scientist'* 
been  loudly  finding  fault  with  the  pelagic  sealers  because  they  kill  female  seals,  yet  he,  too,  would  kill 


has  been  loudly  finding  fault  with  the  pelagic  sealers  becaust 
female  seals,  for  half  of  the  yearlings  are  females.  This  is  " 
that  Nagel,  Bowers,  Lembkey,  and  Jordan  appreciate  as  the 


science"  with  a  vengeance,  and  just  the  kind 

Jordan  appreciate  as  the  tools  of  the  lessees— Mills,  Elkins,  and  Lieber. 

H.W.E. 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA.  37 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then,  Dr.  Stejneger,  I  have  no  further  questions  to  ask  you,  except 
this:  I  would  like  to  ask  about  the  Fur  Trade  Review,  issue  of  September,  1900. 
On  pages  456,  457,  and  458  you  are  cited  as  the  authority  for  the  following  [reading]: 

"STEJNEGER'S  'AUTHORITY'  FOR  EXCESSIVE  LAND  KILLING. 

"WASHINGTON,  May  25,  1901. 

"The  best  authorities  here  (Stejneger  and  the  Treasury  officials)  agree  that  there  is 
no  necessity  for  a  limit  to  the  killing  of  the  lessees  on  the  islands  for  two  reasons:  First, 
because  it  is  conceded  that  the  welfare  of  the  present  herd  requires  the  taking  of  as 
many  killable  males  per  annum  as  can  be  found;  and,  second,  because  '  *  *  the 
proposed  agreement  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  would  leave  this 
Government  the  sole  proprietor  of  the  sealing  industry  in  the  eastern  half  of  the 
Pacific  Ocean  and  Bering  Sea."  (Fur  Trade  Review,  June.  1901,  pp.  285-286.} 

Do  you  still  think  it  is  the  best  thing  to  do  to  kill  everything  that  can  be  found 
up  there? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  It  depends  upon  the  way — the  exact  words — in  which  you  put  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Here  is  the  sentiment;  is  this  your  idea? — 

"That  there  is  no  necessity  to  the  limit  of  the  killing  of  the  lessees  on  the  islands 
because  it  is  conceded  that  the  welfare  of  the  present  herd  requires  the 
taking  of  as  many  killable  males  per  annum  as  can  be  found." 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  The  point  is  "as  can  be  found."  If  you  eliminate  that,  I  can 
well  conceive  that  I  had  advised  as  stated. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  willing.  You  can  eliminate  everything  and  anything  you  have 
done.  I  do  not  object.  But  I  want  to  know  if  you  gave  him  that  impression,  that 
he  could  go  up  and  kill  everything  he  could  find  and  do  no  harm. 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Xot  everything  and  "do  no  harm." 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  mean  "killable  seals." 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Killable  seals? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  mean  killable  seals— everything  he  could  find. 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  That  must  be  within  the  proper  season  for  the  killing. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  1910. 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  You  want  to  pin  me  down  to 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  are  a  scientist,  and  you  can  not  be  pinned  down. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  He  is  referring  to  the  statement. 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  have  nothing  to  do  with  that.  It  is  hearsay  of  a  report  of  some- 
thing; I  have  nothing  to  do  with  that. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  ask  you  if  you  hold  those  views? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Let  me  state  what  I  hold  and  what  I  don't  hold,  in  my  own  words: 
I  hold  that  you  can  kill,  in  the  months  of  June  and  July — that  is  the  season  practically 
when  the  killing  is  done-— in  the  season  you  can  kill  all  the  males  without  any  detri- 
ment to  the  herd.  I  will  say  all  the  usable  skins,  three  years  and  less;  that  is  my 
opinion,  my  deliberate  opinion. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  But  I  understood  Prof.  Elliott  to  ask  you  whether  you  advised  Mr. 
Bowers. 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  may  have  said  that  very  thing 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Kill  all  the  killable  seals? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is,  all  he  can  find. 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  With  the  limitation  if  in  season.  I  undoubtedly  advised  such  a 
thing,  and  should  advise  it  now. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  think  all  the  killable  seals  should  be  taken  for  the  good  of 
the  herd? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  All  the  killable  seals  that  you  can  take  there  at  that  time.  The 
fact  is  that  you  can  not  take  all  of  the  killable  seals. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  seems  to  me--I  am  only  trying  to  clear  it  up  so  that  we  will  not 
have  a  misunderstanding  when  it  is  over — you  should  state  whether  you  think  it  is 
best  for  the  herd  to  take  all  of  the  killable  seals. 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  With  that  reservation,  all  the  killable  seals  that  you  can  kill  within 
the  season.  I  do  not  mean  that  you  can 

The  CHAIRMAN.  That  you  can  find? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  The  ones  that  you  can  catch. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  perfectly  clear;  that  is  all  I  wanted. 


38  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

THE     SUBORNATION     OF     SCIENCE     TO     SERVE    A    CRIMINAL     TRESPASS 
ON    THE    FUR-SEAL   HERD    OF   ALASKA. 

(To  justify  the  killing  of  all  the  young  male  seals,  the  false  argu- 
ment was  used  that  if  they  did  not  ao  so  they  would  only  grow  up,  go 
onto  the  breeding  grounds,  fight  there,  "and  tear  the  cows  to  pieces 
and  trample  the  pups  to  death/'  Dr.  Stejneger  was  one  of  the  scien- 
tific authorities  quoted  for  this  nonsense  and  fraud.) 

Dr.  Stejneger  denies  in  his  report  of  1898,  his  own  sworn  statement 
made  to  the  House  committee  of  May  4,  1912,  in  re  trampled  pups. 
He  does  so  in  the  most  explicit  language,  and  he  is  now  quoted  below 
from  his  finished  and  Belabor  ate  report/'  which  he  handed  to  the 
chairman  when  he  was  sworn  and  examined.  He  says  in  it  that  the 
pups  are  not  harmed  by  severe,  prolonged  trampling,  to  wit: 

It  is  certainly  significant  that  on  Bering  Island  over  a  thousand  pups  are  yearly 
driven  to  the  killing  ground,  there  to  be  released,  without  any  visible  harm  coming  to 
them  worth  mentioning.  If  these  newly  born  seals  can  stand  to  be  driven  three- 
fourths  of  a  mile  from  Kishotchnoye  and  to  be  repeatedly  trampled  upon  by  the  larger 
ones  piling  up  four  high  or  more  on  top  of  them,  it  stands  to  reason  that  the  vigorous 
holustiaki,  or  even  the  females  as  a  whole,  can  suffer  but  little  injury  from  the  same 
cause.  (The  Fur-Seal  Investigations,  Pt.  IV,  1898,  p.  101,  by  Leonhard  Stejneger.) 

After  having  deliberately  published  the  above  as  " facts"  of  his 
own  observation  in  1898,  yet  Dr.  Leonhard  Stejneger  in  1912  denies 
it  under  oath  to  the  House  committee  as  follows, 

Witness  the  following  sworn  proof  of  it,  to  wit : 

INVESTIGATION  OF  FUR-SEAL  INDUSTRY  OF  ALASKA. 

COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 
DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Saturday,  May  4,  1912. 

The  committee  met  at  10  o'clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman)  pre- 
siding. 

Present:  Messrs.  Young,  McGillicuddy,  and  McGuire. 

STATEMENT   OF    LEONHARD    STEJNEGER. 

LEONARD  STEJNEGER,  having  been  duly  sworn,  was  examined,  and  testified  as 
follows: 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  In  that  case,  I  should  say  I  first  came  to  the  Commander  Islands  in 
1882  and  stayed  until  the  fall  of  1883,  remaining  the  winter. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Continuously? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Yes.  I  saw  the  whole  business  from  beginning  to  end  during  two 
seasons.  I  mapped  the  rookeries,  and  I  have  made  a  very  elaborate  report  on  that. 
This  [handing  book  to  the  chairman]  gives  all  the  data. 

In  1896  I  was  appointed  a  member  of  the  Fur-Seal  Investigation  Commission,  of 
which  Dr.  Jordan  was  the  chairman.  We  went  up  early  in  the  season  and  I  stayed  on 
the  Pribilof  Islands  for  10  days  with  the  other  members  of  the  commission  and  went 
all  over  the  rookeries  at  that  time,  and  did  part  of  the  counting  of  the  rookeries  on  the 
American  islands,  and  then  went  over  to  the  Commander  Islands  again  and  inspected 
the  rookeries  there,  mapped  the  distribution  of  the  seals  on  the  rookeries  then  as  com- 
pared to  what  they  were  in  1882,  1883,  and  1895. 

******* 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  According  to  your  observation,  now,  Doctor,  if  those  herds  were  left 
alone  untouched  by  man,  what  would  you  regard  as  the  principal  agencies  of  destruc- 
tion of  that  animal  life? 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  39 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Fighting  of  the  males  and  trampling  of  the  pups. 
^fr.  McGuiRE.  Then,  where  they  were  left  untouched  until  they  had  accumulated 
large  numbers  of  males,  would  there  have  been  trampling  under  those  conditions? 
Dr.  STEJNEGER.  That  is  the  greatest  danger  to  the  herd. 

******* 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Now,  your  testimony  with  respect  to  the  killing  of  the  pups  by  the 
fighting  of  battles  by  the  males  is  based  upon  not  only  your  general  information'  that 
you  have  been  able  to  obtain  in  general  way,  but  as  well  upon  two  years'  actual  stay 
upon  seal  islands? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  And  upon  your  actual  observation? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Surveys  of  the  rookeries. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  You  have  personally  observed  those  conditions,  have  you? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Yes,  sir.     (Hearing  No.  11,  pp.  699,  700,  703.) 

On  May  16,  1912,  a  few  days  following  the  above  date  of  Stejneger's 
strange  testimony  as  to  the  "destruction"  caused  by  the  killing  of 
ups  by  the  trampling  of  them  by  fighting  males,  his  own  associate, 
F.  A.  Lucas,  on  the  India*!  Commission,  1897-98,  swears  that  he 
knows  better — that  he  never  saw  a  bull  trample  a  pup  to  death: 

The  CHAIRMAN.  AYhat  experience  have  you  had  as  to  the  fur-seal  industry  in 
Alaska  or  as  a  member  of  the  advisory  board? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  was  a  member  of  the  Fur-Seal  Commission  in  1896  and  1897.  In  1896 
I  was  on  the  islands  or  on  the  revenue  cutter  visiting  the  pelagic  sealers  from  July  8  to 
September  5.  In  1897  I  was  on  the  islands,  on  the  revenue  cutter  visiting  pelagic 
sealers  and  going  to  and  from  St.  Paul  and  St.  George  from  July  1  to  August  17.  The 
records  of  the  work  are  here,  Mr.  Chairman  [exhibiting  books]. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  Dr.  Lucas,  did  you  see  up  there  a  pup  trampled  to  death  by  a 
bull? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No.     (Hearing  No.  12,  May  16, 1912,  pp.  706-719.) 

DR.  JORDAN  CONDEMNS  THE  KILLING  OF  YEARLINGS  BY  THE  OLD 
LESSEES  IN  1889,  BUT  HE  PERMITS  AND  APPROVES  THAT  KILLING 
BY  THE  NEW  LESSEES  IN  1896-97,  AND  EVEN  WHEN  SO  DONE  IN 
VIOLATION  OF  LAW  AND  REGULATIONS. 

That  Dr.  Jordan  knew  that  the  killing  of  yearlings  was  wrong  and 
injurious  to  the  life  of  the  fur-seal  herd,  he  gives  the  following  proof 
of  in  his  final  report  of  February  24,  1898,  to- wit:  Speaking  of  the 
result  of  the  work  of  killing  by  the  lessees  of  1870  during  the  last 
years  of  their  lease,  Dr.  Jordan  writes: 

For  a  time  these  more  vigorous  methods  had  the  desired  effect,  but  the  scarcity  of 
bachelors  as  a  result  of  the  decreasing  birth  rate  made  it  necessary  finally  to  lower 
the  age  for  killable  seals,  so  as  to  include  first,  the  2-year-olds,  and  in  the  end  many 
of  the  larger  yearlings,  in  order  to  secure  the  requisite  100,000  skins.  By  these 
methods  it  happened  in  1889  that  practically  the  whole  bachelor  herd  of  4  years 
and  under  down  to  the  yearlings  was  wiped  out.  The  result  was  the  abnormal  drop 
to  21,000  in  the  quota  of  1890.  *  *  * 

It  is  not  the  intention  here  to  justify  the  methods  of  killing  employed  in  the  clos- 
ing years  of  the  Alaska  Commercial  Co.  Such  killing  ought  never  to  have  been 
allowed.  (Fur-Seal  Inves.  pt.  1,  1898,  p.  124.) 

With  this  full  understanding  of  the  impropriety  of  killing  those 
small  seals  thus  given  to  us  by  Dr.  Jordan,  as  above  quoted,  this  gen- 
tleman actually  has  stultified  himself  by  that  writing  as  above,  for  he 
has  approved  and  licensed  in  1896  and  1897  the  same  injurious  and 
illegal  Rilling.  He  has  done  so  in  the  following  report,  dated  Novem- 
ber 1,  1897,  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  to  wit: 

Last  year  the  hauling  grounds  of  the  Pribilof  Islands  yielded  30.000  killable  seals; 
during  the  present  season  a  quota  of  only  20,890  could  be  taken.  To  get  these  it  was 
necessary  to  drive  more  frequently  and  cull  the  animals  more  closely  than  has  been 


40  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

done  since  1889.  The  killing  season  was  closed  on  July  27,  1896.  This  year  it  was 
extended  on  St.  Paul  to  August  7,  and  on  St.  George  to  August  11.  The  quota  to  be 
taken  was  left  to  our  discretion,  and  every  opportunity  was  given  to  the  lessees  to  take 
the  full  product  of  the  hauling  grounds.  Notwithstanding  all  their  efforts,  the  quota 
of  1897  shows  a  decrease  of  30  per  cent  in  the  class  of  killable  seals,  and  when  we  take 
into  account  the  increased  number  of  drives,  and  the  extension  of  the  times  of  driving, 
the  difference  between  the  two  seasons  is  even  greater.  (Fur  Seal  Investigations,  Pre- 
liminary Report  of  1897,  Treas.  Doc.  No.  1994,  p.  18,  Nov.  1,  1897.) 

Again,  Dr.  Jordan  knew  what  yearlings  were  taken  for  skins, 
for  he  described  that  taking  in  1889  as  follows,  when  reviewing  the 
tables  of  killing  made  by  the  lessees  in  1889  as  compared  with  that 
killing  by  them  in  1890.  Dr.  Jordan  says: 

The  contrast  here  visible  between  1889  and  1890  is  by  no  means  a  measure  of  cor- 
responding decrease  in  the  breeding  herd.  The  fact  is  that  the  fictitious  quota  of 
1889  was  made  up  largely  of  yearlings  which  belonged  properly  to  the  quota  of  1891. 
(Fur  Seal  Inves.,  1898,  pt,  1,  p.  202.  > 

When  Dr.  Jordan  certified  the  catch  of  1896  (30,000)  to  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury  on  November  7,  1896,  as  being  made  up  of  3  and 
2  year  olds,  and  did  not  tell  the  truth  that  over  8,000  of  these  30,000 
skins  taken  by  the  lessees  were  yearlings,  he  knew  better.  (Treas. 
Doc.  No.  1913,  p.  21.) 

He  knew  better  because  the  lessees  did  not  take  any  smaller  skins 
in  1896  than  they  did  in  1899.  They  took  the  yearlings  or  "  small 
pups"  and  "Ex.  sm.  pups"  in  1889,  just  as  Jordan  says  they  did.  They 
took  the  same  "Small  pups"  and  "Ex.  sm.  pups"  in  1896—8,000  of 
them — and  Jordan  denies  the  fact;  he  denies  it  by  ignoring  it,  and 
asserting  that  "22,000  of  these"  (30,000)  were  3-year-olds,  when  in 
truth  not  quite  7,500  of  them  were. 

The  London  sales  records,  which  proves  the  truth  of  Jordan's  state- 
ment, that  the  lessees  killed  yearlings  in  1889,  also  proves  the  untruth 
of  Jordan's  statement  that  the  lessees  did  not  kill  yearlings  in  1896. 
They  convict  Dr.  Jordan  of  deceit  in  the  matter  and  of  falsifying  the 
record  of  that  killing  in  1896  and  1897. 

DR.  JORDAN  ATTEMPTS  TO  DENY  THE  OFFICIAL  RECORDS  OF  THE  EARLY 
ARRIVAL  OF  THE  YEARLING  SEALS  ON  THE  HAULING  GROUNDS  AND 
THEIR  APPEARANCE  ON  THE  KILLING  GROUNDS;  HE  IS  FLATLY  CON- 
TRADICTED BY  RECORDS  OF  THE  SAME. 

In  his  final  report  of  February  24,  1898,  Dr.  Jordan  says: 

From  the  killing  during  the  present  season  (189G),  15,000  animals  too  small  to  kill 
were  turned  back.  As  in  the  case  of  the  young  bulls,  some  of  these,  perhaps  many, 
were  driven  and  redriven,  several  drives  being  made  from  each  hauling  ground  during 
the  season.  The  actual  number  represented  by  this  total  of  rejected  animals  can 
not  be  exactly  determined.  From  this  it  would  seem  necessary  to  suppose  that  by 
no  means  all  the  younger  seals  appear  on  the  hauling  grounds  during  the  killing 
season.  In  fact,  the  records  of  the  drives  show  that  it  is  only  after  the  middle  of  July 
that  the  yearlings  begin  to  arrive  in  numbers,  and  by  the  time  the  killing  season  is 
over  the  great  majority  of  the  killable  seals  are  secured,  leaving  the  population  of 
the  hauling  grounds  almost  exclusively  yearlings  and  2-year-olds.  (Fur  Seal  Inves. 
pt.  1,  1898,  rept.  Feb.  24.  p.  99.) 

With  the  following  official  ''Records  of  the  drives"  staring  Dr. 
Jordan  in  the  face,  it  seems  fairly  incredible  that  he  should  have 
written  so  much  untruth  as  above  concerning  them  in  re  yearlings. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  41 

\YEDXESDAY,  JUNE  18.  1890. 

Made  a  drive  from  Tolstoi  and  Middle  Hill;  killed  274;  turned  away  19  half-grown 
bulls.  A.s  many  yearlings  as  choice  seals  killed,  and  half. as  many  2-year-olds  as 
yearlings  were  allowed  to  return  to  the  sea.  This  is  a  fair  average  of  the  work  so  far 
this  season.  <  ( )ifi<  ial  Journal  Chief  Special  Agent  Chas.  I.  Goff.  in  charge  of  St. 
Paul  Island,  p.  239.) 

MONDAY.  JUNE  23,  1890. 

The  N.  A.  C.  Co.  made  a  drive  from  Tolstoi  and  Middle  Hill,  killing  521  seals. 
Seventy-five  per  cent  of  the  seals  driven  to  the  village  were  turned  back  into  the 
sea;  10  per  cent  of  these  were  2-year-olds;  balance  yearlings.  (Official  Journal  Chief 
Special  Agent  Chas.  I.  Goff,  in  charge  of  St.  Paul  Island,  p.  231.) 

TUESDAY,  June  24,  1890. 

N.  A.  C.  Co.  made  a  drive  from  Reef  and  Zotoi  and  killed  426  seals;  about  65  per 
cent  of  this  drive  was  turned  back  into  the  sea,  about  all  of  these  were  yearlings. 
(Official  Journal  Chief  Special  Agent  Chas.  I.  Goff,  in  charge  of  St.  Paul  Island, 
p.  231.) 

THURSDAY,  June  26,  1890. 

The  N.  A.  C.  Co.  made  a  drive  of  seals  Southwest  Bay  and  killed  117  seals;  about  62 
per  cent  of  those  driven  were  turned  back  into  the  sea;  of  those  turned  away  one-half 
were  yearlings,  one-fourth  2-year-olds,  and  one-fourth  old  bulls..  (Official  Journal 
Chief  Special  Agent  Chas.  J.  Goff,  in  charge  of  St.  Pauls  Island,  p.  231.) 

Then  independent  of  the  above  official  record,  which  not  only 
declares  that  the  yearlings  are  out  in  full  force  as  early  as  June  18, 
on  the  killing  grounds,  driven  up  with  the  others,  we  have  the  fol- 
lowing sworn  proof  of  the  unwarranted  denial  of  Dr.  Jordan  in  re 
early  appearance  of  the  yearlings,  to  wit : 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  as  to  yearlings  on  the  islands.  Here  is  an  official  report  detailed 
day  after  day  during  the  killing  season  of  1890,  put  on  the  files  of  the  Treasury  Depart- 
ment, and  printed,  and  until  the  1st  of  December,  1907,  not  a  line  had  been  issued 
from  the  Government  officialism  in  charge  of  this  business — not  a  line  that  says  a 
single  record  of  this  work  as  to  the  killing  on  those  islands  in  1890  is  improperly  stated 
here.  The  only  objection  they  make  to  it  was  that  I  officially  assumed  that  driving 
these  young  and  old  seals  hurt  them.  They  claimed  it  did  not  hurt  them,  but  that 
it  did  them  good.  We  will  leave  that  open.  But  the  killing  has  hurt  them;  they 
admit  that  now  officially.  Let  me  read,  on  page  170: 

"Monday,  June  23,  1890.  *  *  *  Eleven  pods  of  561  animals  driven  up;  110  of 
them  killed  or  one-fifth  taken,  or  80  per  cent  turned  away.  All  under  7-pound  skins, 
with  the  exception  of  a  few  wigged  4-year-olds  and  a  dozen  or  two  old  bulls.  This 
gives  a  fair  average  of  the  whole  diive  to-day,  some  2,500  animals,  since  518  only  were 
taken. 

Those  turned  away  (nearly  2,000)  were  95  per  cent  at  least  'long'  and 
1  short '  yearlings. ' ' 

That  has  never  been  disputed  to  this  hour. 

"June  21,  1890.  *  *  At  7  a.  m.  I  went  down  to  the  killing  grounds  and  fol- 
lowed the  podding  and  clubbing  of  the  entire  drive  brought  up  from  the  Reef  crest 
and  Zoltoi  Bluffs  this  morning.  The  Zoltoi  pod  arrived  on  the  ground  long  before 
the  Reef  pod — two  hours  sooner.  It  was  made  up  largely  of  polseecatchie  and 
yearlings. 

*    Seventy-five  per  cent  of  this  drive  was  rejected.     Every  3  and  smooth 
4  year  old  taken  and  every  long  2-year-old.     Nothing  under  or  over  that  grade. 

"The  seals  released  this  morning  were  exclusively  yearlings,  'short'  2-year-olds, 
and  the  5  and  6  year  old  half  bulls  or  polseecatchie.  No  'long'  2-year-old  escaped, 
and  so,  therefore,  many  5£  and  6  pound  skins  will  appear  in  this  catch. 

' '  In  the  afternoon  I  took  a  survey  of  Lukannon  Bay  and  its  hauling  grounds.     * 
Thence  over  to  Tolstoi  sand  dunes,  where  I  saw  about  600  or  700  yearlings,  conspicu- 
ous by  their  white  bellies. 

******* 

"June  26,  1890  (on  p.  174).  I  walked  over  to  the  Zapadnie  killing  grounds  this 
morning,  arriving  there  about  9  o'clock.  The  drivers  had  collected  a  squad  of  about 
340  holluschickie,  which  were  clubbed  thus — total  344  number  driven,  and  num- 
ber taken,  97,  or  about  72  per  cent  unfit  to  take,  being  made  up  chiefly  of  yearlings, 
'short'  2-year-olds,  and  'wigged'  4-year-olds,  and  5-year  up  to  7-year  old  bulls." 


42  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

I  knew  what  I  was  talking  about,  and  so  did  the  lessees.  They  rejected  the  year- 
lings and  the  short  2-year-olds. 

"June  27,  1890.  The  drive  to-day  from  Middle  Hill,  Tolstoi,  and  Bobrovia  Yama 
(of  Tolstoi  near  the  point)  panned  out  as  follows:  Total  number  driven  1,652;  total 
number  taken  394. 

"Deduct  24  overcounted,  leaves  the  whole  number  of  animals  driven  1,628;  number 
taken  394,  or  78  per  cent  rejected.  Nothing  taken  under  a  6-pound  or  'long'  2-year- 
old  skin.  " 

Nothing  was  taken  that  day. 

"Sixteen  of  the  394  skins  taken  in  the  killing  grounds,  as  above  cited,  were  rejected, 
in  the  salt  house  by  the  company's  manager  because  thay  were  too  small.  They  were 
normal  2-year-olds,  SJ-pound  skins.  Perhaps  they  will  be  glad  to  get  them  later. ' ' 

They  were. 

' '  June  28, 1890.  The  superb  sealing  weather  still  continues.  The  natives  are  bring- 
ing up  a  small  squad  from  the  Reef  as  I  write  (5  p.  m.). 

"The  following  are  field  notes  of  the  podding  and  clubbing  of  drive  from  Reef  and 
Zoltoi  Bluffs,  June  28,  1890: 

"Whole  number  of  animals  driven,  1,417;  number  taken,  203,  or  85  per  cent 
turned  out.  *  *  *  Everything  taken  in  this  day's  killing  above  a  normal  2-year- 
ol(j  *  *  *  i.  e.,  all  6-pound  skins  and  upward. 

"June  30,  1890.  The  following  are  field  notes  of  the  podding  and  clubbing  of  drive 
from  Middle  Hill,  English  Bay,  Tolstoi,  Lukannon,  and  Ketavie: 

"Whole  number  of  animals  driven,  1,262;  number  taken,  203,  or  84$  per  cent  re- 
jected. *  *  *  Everything  taken  that  was  above  5^-pound  skin,  under  those  of 
the  5-year-olds  and  'wigged'  4-year-olds.  *  *  *  How  many  of  those  yearlings 
and  'short'  2-year-olds  that  were  released  this  morning  will  again  be  driven  before  this 
season  ends?  *  Nearly  all  of  them. 

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  * 

"July  1,  1890.  The  following  are  field  notes  of  the  podding  and  clubbing  of  drive 
made  from  every  section  of  the  reef,  everything  in  back  of  Zoltoi  Bluffs,  Garbotch, 
and  the  entire  circuit  of  the  reef: 

"Whole  number  of  animals  driven,  1,998;  number  taken,  245,  or  89  per  cent  re- 
jected. Last  drive  from  this  place,  June  28,  when  85  per  cent  were  rejected.  Every- 
thing taken  over  a  5-pound  skin  and  under  the  '  wigged '  4  and  5  year  old  pelts.  Ninety 
per  cent  of  the  seals  rejected  to-day  were  yearlings.' ' 

There  are  no  yearlings  on  the  islands  now,  we  are  told  by  these  gentlemen.  They 
have  disappeared;  they  have  gone  to  sea.  There  is  no  loss  from  pelagic  sealing  there 
now. 

"This  is  the  largest  number  yet  driven  in  any  one  drive  from  this  place  thus  far  this 
season,  and  the  catch  among  the  smallest.  The  yearlings  driven  before,  plus  the  new 
arrivals,  are  making  the  ratio." 

The  yearlings  keep  coming  up  and  increasing  this  aggregate  drive. 

"July  2,  1890.  The  following  are  field  notes  of  the  podding  and  clubbing  of  a  drive 
made  from  every  section  of  Polavina  and  Stony  Point: 

"Whole  number  of  animals  driven,  1 ,929;  number  taken,  2.°>0,  or  88£  per  cent  reject- 
ed. There  were  also  10  "road"  and  "smothered"  skins,  which  made  a  tolal  of  240 
taken;  last  drive  from  this  place,  Juno  25,  when  800  animals  were  driven  and  263 
taken,  or  65  per  cent  rejected. 

"This  drive  to-day  covers  a  whole  week's  interval  since  the  last  drive  from  Pola- 
vina, and  it  shows  that  as  the  season  advances  the  numbers  driven  rapidly  increase, 
while  the  proportionate  catch  diminishes.  In  other  words,  the  new  arrivals,  plus 
those  redriven,  will  continue  to  steadily  swell  the  gross  aggregate  driven  day  by  day 
from  now  on,  and  not  proportionately"  increase  the  catch.  Rather,  I  believe  that 
the  catch  will  markedly  diminish. 

"To-day  every  good  2-year-old,  every  3,  and  every  "smooth  "  4-year-old  was  knocked 
down  out  of  the  1,929  animals;  every  one.  Where,  at  this  rate  of  killing,  is  the  new 
blood  left  for  the  rookeries  now  so  desperately  needed  there?  Hardly  a  young  bull 
left,  between  the  effects  of  driving  and  the  deadly  club,  save  a  few  hundred  of  those 
demoralized  and  worthless  half  bulls,  which  I  make  note  of  as  they  come  up  in  every 
drive:  and  these,  the  natives  truly  declare,  will  never  go  upon  the  rookeries. 

"Thus  far  this  season  every  seal  that  is  eligible  in  weight,  from  a  "long"  2-year-old 
male  up  to  5-vear-olds,  has  been  ruthlessly  slain  within  a  few  days  after  its  appearance 
on  these  desolate  hauling  grounds  of  St.  Paul  Island .  They  were  as  ruthlessly  knocked 
down  last  year,  and  to-day  the  yearlings  and  everything  above  to  5-year-olds  would 
be  knocked  down  did  not  the  new  $10.22  tax  per  sealskin  save  their  lives." 

They  were  afraid  to  take  these  yearlings,  and  they  gave  orders  to  let  them  alone. 
They  said,  "They  will  not  pay  our  taxes  and  our  expenses." 


FUR-SEAL   HERD    OF   ALASKA.  43 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  The  point  you  are  developing  now  is,  as  I  understand  it,  that  the 

rrlings  at  that  time  were  on  the  islands  at  this  certain  season  of  the  year  mentioned 
you? 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.    Yes:  admittedly. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  The  claim  by  certain  persons  now  is  that  seals  of  this  age  and  type 
are  not  at  that  season  found  on  the  islands.  Is  that  what  you  are  developing  now? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  claiming  that  that  is  an  untruthful  and  improper  report  to  make; 
that  they  are  not  there  means  that  they  have  been  killed  and  certified  falsely  into 
the  books  of  the  Government  as  2-year-olds.  Do  not  make  any  mistake  about  that. 

As  above  quoted  from  Dr.  Jordan's  studied,  elaborated,  and  final 
report  of  February  24,  1898,  he  gives  as  proof  of  the  fact  that  he 
knew  them — he  knew  the  yearling  seals  as  a  class,  and  knew  them  well. 

So  knowing  them,  he  could  not  have  failed  to  witness  the  killing 
of  yearlings  in  1896-1897,  thousands  and  thousands  of  them,  in  open, 
flagrant  violation  of  the  " Carlisle  Rules"  of  May  14,  1896,  which 
were  duly  posted  on  the  Pribilof  Islands,  June  17,  1896. 

That  he  knew  the  significance  and  the  evil  effect  of  killing  year- 
lings in  1898  he  also  gives  us  full  proof  of  in  his  final  report  of 
February  24,  1898.  In  criticizing  the  close  and  Improper  killing 
by  the  lessees  during  the  season  of  1889  he  says,  on  page  103: 

Finally  it  was  necessary  successively  to  lower  the  grade  of  killable  skins  until,  in 
1889,  to  get  the  quota  of  100,000  nearly  the  entire  bachelor  herd  down  to  and  including 
most  of  the  yearlings  was  taken.  In  1890  the  collapse  came,  when  only  21,000  skins 
could  be  secured. 

With  this  full  knowledge  possessed  by  Dr.  Jordan  of  what  a  year- 
ling seal  was,  and  what  it  signified  to  kill  down  to  that  lowest  grade, 
he  actually  falsifies  the  record  of  killing  30,000  seals  in  1896,  as 
done  under  his  eyes.  In  his  report  of  the  killing  on  the  Pribilof 
Islands  during  June  and  July,  1896,  he  denies  that  any  yearling 
seals  were  killed,  and  repeats  that  untruth  for  the  season's  work  of 
1897,  on  the  same  grounds,  in  the  following  statements,  to  wit: 

In  1896,  30,000  killable  males  were  taken,  22,000  of  these  to  the  best  of  our  informa- 
tion, being  3-year-olds. 

Think  for  a  moment  of  this  studied  untruth — the  same  London 
sales  records  which  gave  Dr.  Jordan  his  warrant  for  truthfully  stating 
the  fact  that  yearlings  were  taken  in  1889,  as  above  cited — these 
sales  records  of  this  1896  catch  of  30,000  declare  the  fact  that  not 
quite  7,500  3  year  olds  were  taken,  and,  moreover,  they  tell  him  that 
some  8,000  or  9,000  yearlings  were  also  taken. 

In  1897  the  lessees  took  20,890  skins— all  that  they  could  get— 
and  Jordan  again  stands  over  that  work  on  the  islands.  Again  he 
falsifies  the  record  of  this  killing  as  follows : 

The  quota  of  the  year  is  made  up  practically  of  3-year-old  bachelors:  some  2-year- 
olds  are  killed  and  some  4-year-olds,  but  the  majority  of  those  taken  are  3-year-olds. 

Not  quite  7,000  of  that  20,890  skins  taken  in  1897  were  3-year- 
olds.  More  than  8,000  yearlings  were  a^ain  taken  in  its  total,  and 
all  of  those  little  30-34  inch  yearling  skins  actually  "loaded"  with 
blubber  in  1896  and  1897,  so  that  they  weighed  as' much  as  3-year- 
old  skins  or  2-year-old  skins.  This  fraud  of  "loading"  those  little 
skins  was  to  cover  the  Carlisle  limit  of  a  minimum  taken  "not  less 
than  6  pounds  weight." 

This  loading  of  those  small  skins  in  1896-97,  when  Dr.  Jordan 
was  on  the  islands  (and  continued  ever  since),  and  so  done  then, 
first,  to  evade  the  Carlisle  rules  of  May  14,  1896,  could  not  have 


44  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

escaped  Dr.  Jordan's  notice  unless  he  was  physically  blind.  He  was 
not,  but  he  actually  shut  his  eyes  to  the  illegal  and  injurious  work. 

On  July  24,  1913,  the  native  sealers  who  took  part  in  this  " load- 
ing "  of  those  small  yearling  skins  in  1896-97,  testified  to  the  agents 
of  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  the  Department  of 
Commerce  that  this  season  of  1896  was  the  first  one  in  which  they 
ever  received  orders  to  take  yearling  seals,  and  that  they  have  been 
taking  them  ever  since  and  ''loading"  them  also.  (See  pp.  93-100, 
Kept.  Agents  House  Committee  on  Expenditures,  Dept.of  Com., 
Aug.  31,  1913.) 

Dr.  Jordan,  however,  was  not  content  with  merely  ignoring  the 
fact  that  in  1896  he  had  permitted  the  lessees  to  kill  more  than 
8,000  yearling  seals  in  open  flagrant  violation  of  the  Carlisle  rules 
of  May  14,  1896;  he  went  further.  On  page  206  of  his  Final  Report 
Fur  Seal  Investigations,  part  1,  1898,  he  has  this  studied  statement 
of  untruth  made  in  review  of  the  figures  which  show  the  daily  kill- 
ing made  during  June  and  July,  1896,  and  also  those  of  1897,  to  wit: 

In  this  year  (1896)  more  normal  driving  was  permitted,  but  the  increased  quota  is 
not  wholly  due  to  this  fact  '  *. 

The  quota  of  1897  was  left  indefinite  under  the  direction  of  the  commission,  and 
the  driving  was  planned  with  a  view  of  making  the  quota  represent  the  full  product 
of  the  hauling  grounds.  For  tl.e  same  reason  the  killing  was  continued  into  August 
(to  Aug.  11). 

This  is  the  language  which  Dr.  Jordan  uses  to  conceal  the  fact 
that  in  1896  the  lessees  were  permitted  to  illegally  take  8,000  small 
yearling  seals,  and  in  1897  over  7,000  of  them  in  turn,  to  get  the 
"full  product  of  the  hauling  grounds:" 

Why  did  Dr.  Jordan  and  his  associates  in  1896  and  1897  fail  to  publish  a  table  show- 
ing the  sizes  and  weights  of  fur-seal  skins  as  they  were  taken  from  the  1,  2,  3,  4,  and  5 
year  old  seals? 

Because  if  they  had,  they  would  have  been  obliged  to  publish  the  fact  that  the 
lessees  took  8,000  yearling  sealskins  in  1896,  under  their  eyes,  and  in  violation  of  the 
law  and  regulations  published  May  14,  1896.  And  again,  that  over  7,000  yearling 
skins  were  taken  by  the  lessees  under  their  eyes,  and  with  their  permission  in  1897, 
in  violation  of  those  Carlisle  rules  of  1896. 

The  lack  of  attention  given  to  the  subject  of  the  sizes  and  weights 
of  fur-seal  skins  which  is  so  marked  in  the  preliminary  reports  of  (he 
Jordan-Thompson  fur-seal  commission's  work,  and  its  final  report, 
1898,  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  lessees  were  killing  yearling  seals  on 
St.  Paul  Island  in  1896,  when  Jordan  was  there  in  full  control  of  the 
business. 

These  seal-island  lessees  (D.  O.  Mills,  United  States  Senator  Elkins 
and  the  Liebes,  Isaac  and  Hermann),  could  not  get  their  quota  allowec 
them  of  30,000  2,  3,  and  4  year  old  seals,  they  unlawfully  took,  there- 
fore, 8,000  yearling  seals  to  fill  up  the  number.  They  took  them  in 
spite  of  the  regulations  ordered  May  14,  1896,  by  Secretary  Carlisle 
prohibiting  that  work. 

If  Jordan  and  his  associates  had  measured  and  weighed  those  skins 
as  taken,  they  would  have  made  a  record  (which  they  desired  to  con 
ceal,  and  did  then  conceal),  very  plain,  and  self-evident  of  this  illega 
slaughter  by  these  lessees. 

That  is  the  reason  why  the  authentic  and  official  tables  of  1873-74, 
which  show  the  size  and  weight  of  yearling  seals  and  their  skins,  were 
not  alluded  to  or  questioned  by  Dr.  Jordan.  He  found  them  accu- 
rate, and  beyond  his  power  to  question.  He  then  ignored  the  whol 


• 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  45 

subject  in  his  labored,  elaborated  final  report  of  1898.  (Fur  Seal 
Investigations,  pts.  1,  2,  3,  4,  1898.) 

But  when  this  final  report  was  prepared,  Dr.  Lucas  was  obliged  to 
present  at  least  the  suggestion  of  a  table  which  should  show  the  size 
of  the  fur  seal  as  it  grows  from  birth  to  full  maturity.  (See  p.  7, 
pt.  3,  Fur  Seal  Investigations,  1898.) 

Instead  of  taking  up  a  dozen  or  twenty  examples  of  a  yearling,  he 
takes  but  one;  he  measures  it,  and  it  conforms  exactly  to  the  average 
which  Elliott  has  published  nearly  26  years  earlier,  it  so  happens. 

But  when  he  takes  a  single  2  year  old,  he  makes  it  to  be  only 
42  inches  long,  instead  of  that  average  of  45  inches  which  Elliott 

§ets  from  the  measurements  of  30  specimens.  (See  Elliott's  Mono, 
eal  Islands,  p.  46,  1873-74.) 

On  the  other  hand,  Dr.  Lucas's  associate  on  this  Indian  commis- 
sion at  the  same  time  (1896),  George  A.  Clark,  measures  also  a  single 
2  year-old,  and  publishes  its  length  as  48  inches.  (See  p.  510,  pt.  2, 
1898,  Fur  Seal  Investigations.) 

That  difference  naturally  exists  between  a  " short"  or  small  2- 
year-old  and  a  "long"  or  large  specimen  of  the  same  age.  Lucas 
measures  one  and  Clark  the  other.  But  Elliott,  in  1872-73,  taking 
note  of  those  extremes,  gathered  up  30  specimens  and  took  the 
average  length,  and  publishes  it  as  45  inches. 

Elliott  found  that  large  yearlings  were  41  inches  long  and  small 
ones  only  29  to  30.  He  took  an  average  of  20  or  30  specimens  and 
placed  the  correct  figure  of  38  inches  for  a  yearling's  length  in  his 
table  of  1873. 

In  the  same  mistaken  manner  Lucas  took  the  measurements  of 
but  a  single  3-year-old  seal's  body.  He  made  it  49  inches  long. 
It  was  a  "short"  or  small  specimen.  But  Clark,  on  the  other  hand, 
gets  a  "long"  or  large  3-year-old,  and  he  makes  it  54  inches  long. 
Elliott,  however,  took  an  average  of  20  or  30  specimens,  and  he  finds 
the  real  average  size  to  be  52  inches  in  length,  which  makes  a  stable 
conclusion  for  a  3-year-old. 

Lucas  and  Clark  fail  in  their  work  of  getting  result  of  sense  or 
value  by  not  going  out  into  the  field  and  getting  the  measurements 
of  30  or  40  specimens  of  these  1,  2,  3,  and  4  year-old  seals'  bodies. 
Elliott  made  no  such  blunder  which  both  Lucas  and  Clark  admit 
they  have  done  in  the  following  statements: 

I  agree  with  Mr.  Lucas  on  looking  at  these  bachelors  that  it  is  necessary  to  readjust 
our  ideas  *  *  *  what  we  have  called  "4-year-olds"  are  probably  "5-year- 
olds."— G.  A.  Clark,  p.  436,  pt.  2. 

I  see  that  my  tendency  has  been  to  underestimate  the  age  of  the  smaller  seals  *  *  * 
(F.  A.  Lucas,  p.  441,  pt.  2.) 

THE   INITIAL  FRAUD  ON   THE   SEAL  ISLANDS,   AS  PERPETRATED  BY  THE 
LESSEES    AND    OTHERS    IN    1890-91. 

There  is  an  official  record  of  the  killing  of  seals  on  St.  Pauls 
Island  by  which  the  lessees  were  enabled  illegally  to  take  3,856  skins 
in  violation  of  the  orders  of  the  President  of  the  United  States — so 
enabled  by  the  subornation  of  the  Government  agents  in  charge  of 
the  Seal  Islands.  The  limit  of  6,000  skins  was  posted  on  St.  Pauls 
Island  June  10,  1891,  and  1,500  skins  on  St.  George  was  posted  June 
13,  1891.  (Kept.  Agts.  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Commerce,  pp.  128-132, 
Aug.  31,  1913.) 


46  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF   ALASKA. 

When  the  limit  of  6,000  skins  for  the  entire  season  of  1891,  on  St. 
Paul  was  posted  June  10,  1891,  just  810  skins  had  been  taken,  and  by 
June  18,  1891,  at  the  close  of  the  killing  on  the  reef  that  day,  6,622 
skins  had  been  taken,  or  an  excess  then  of  622  skins  for  the  whole 
season. 

The  killing,  however,  in  spite  of  this  peremptory  order  of  the 
President  prohibiting  it  after  6,000  seals  had  been  taken,  was  con- 
tinued in  open  defiance  of  that  order  by  the  lessees  up  to  August  10, 
1891,  when  they  had  secured  3,856  skins  above  the  lawful  limit  on 
St.  Paul  and  961  skins  above  their  lawful  limit  on  St.  George 
Island.  Then  they  resumed  this  unlawful  excess  killing  on  November 
2,  1891,  and  continued  it  to  December  5,  1891,  taking  800  skins  in 
addition  to  the  exceess  ab'ove  stated. 

This  record  of  that  unlawful  killing  and  criminal  trespass  declares 
that  these  lessees,  in  collusion  with  the  Government  agents  in  charge, 
W.  H.  Williams  and  Joseph  Stanley-Brown,  took  4,817  prime  seal- 
skins during  the  season  of  1891  in  open  flagrant  violation  of  the  law 
and  their  instructions. 

The  motive  for  that  particular  criminal  trespass  was  to  profit  by  the 
sale  of  those  excess  skins  at  $60  per  skin,  or  $289,020,  which  was  a  net 
guilty  profit  realized  by  said  lessees. 

The  British  commissioners,  when  they  landed  July  29,  1891,  on 
St.  Pauls  Island  and  found  the  lessees  busy  killing  seals  in  violation 
of  the  proclamation  of  President  Harrison  and  the  agreement  of 
June  14  with  the  Government  of  Great  Britain,  put  a  stop  to  it,  and 
refused  to  be  satisfied  with  the  false  denial  of  it  by  Charles  Foster's 
men,  Brown  and  Williams.  They  dispatched  a  note  to  Lord  Salis- 
bury covering  the  same,  which  was  speedily  made  public,  and  caused 
infinite  humiliation  to  the  American  case  in  the  controversy. 

These  British  commissioners  at  first  determined  to  return  in  1892 
and  get  the  proof  of  the  fact  that  this  killing  was  done  in  violation 
of  the  law.  This  hint  so  disturbed  the  official  tools  of  the  lessees  in 
the  Treasury  Department  that  the  following  ''directions"  were  given 
to  Chief  Special  Agent  Williams  by  Charles  Foster.  The  object  of 
writing  these  "directions"  was  to  enable  Williams  to  do  all  he  could 
to  prevent  any  light  being  thrown  on  the  real  order  of  killing  as  it 
was  done.  (See  entry  as  below,  on  p.  455  of  the  official  journal, 
Government  agent's  office,  St.  Paul  Island,  under  date  of  "May  27, 
1892.") 

UNITED  STATES  TREASURY  DEPARTMENT, 

Washington,  D.  C.,  May  2,  1892. 
Maj.  W.  H.  WILLIAMS, 

United  States  Treasury  Agent. 

SIR:  Your  attention  is  called  to  the  unfortunate  representations  made  to  Lord 
Salisbury  last  year  by  the  British  commissioners. 

Their  statements  concerning  the  alleged  violation  of  the  modus  vivendi  in  the 
matter  of  seal  killing  were  based  upon  their  misinterpretation  of  the  terms  of  the 
modus  and  their  misunderstanding  of  the  facts.  Especial  effort  should  be  made, 
therefore,  to  present  with  exceeding  clearness  any  facts  that  you  may  deem  necessary 
or  proper  to  communicate  to  any  British  official  visiting  either  island.  All  affidavits 
taken  by  such  agents  from  the  natives  or  other  persons  on  the  islands  must  be  taken 
in  the  presence  of  a  Government  officer,  and  the  foreign  agents  must  conform  to  such 
rules  of  conduct  concerning  the  rookeries  as  are  required  of  citizens  of  the  United 
States. 

CHARLES  FOSTER,  Secretary. 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA.  47 

Williams  refused  to  return  to  the  islands.  He  knew  that  he  had 
falsified  the  facts  July  29,  1891,  to  these  British  agents,  and  that 
they  would  convict  him  of  it  if  he  attempted  to  deny  it.  So  he 
asked  Foster  to  transfer  him  to  another  post.  He  was  at  once  trans- 
ferred to  London  and  J.  Stanley  Brown  put  in  his  place.  This  man 
had  no  scruples  hi  the  matter  and  no  responsibility  " officially"  in 
1891,  since  Williams  was  his  chief  at  that  time. 

RECAPITULATION    OF    THE    FRAUD    PERPETRATED    BY    THE    LESSEES    IX 
Tftftl,    ON    THF.     SEAT.    ISLANDS,    WITH    TTTF.    rOT.T.TTSTOlSr   <TF    TWF.    TTftTTF.n 

STATES'  AGENTS  IN  CHARGE  OF  THE  SAME. 

Mav  3.  The  President  vetoes  and  cancels  permit  for  lessees  to  kill 
seals  issued  by  Secretary  Charles  Foster,  April  11,  1891. 

May  97.  By  order  of  the  Secretary  of  Treasury  from  the  President, 
lessees  are  allowed  to  take  7,500  "food  seals"  during  entire  season  of 
1891. 

June  13.  To-day  the  order  of  May  27,  limiting  the  killing  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands  to  7,500  for  the  entire  season  is  posted  and  served  on 
the  lessees  in  St.  Paul  village,  by  the  United  States  agent  in  charge. 
The  catch  on  St.  Paul  is  restricted  to  6,000  seals,  and  the  catch  on 
St.  George  is  restricted  to  1,500. 

Jimp  13.  Three  thousand  seven  hundred  and  thirty  seals  were  taken 
by  the  close  of  this  day,  and  left  2,270  seals  only  for  the  lessees  to 
lawfully  take  during  the  rest  of  this  year  on  St.  Paul  Island. 

June  15.  Nine  hundred  and  forty-one  seals  were  taken  by  the  close 
of  this  day  on  St.  George  Island,  leaving  only  559  seals  for  the  lessees 
to  lawfully  take  during  the  rest  of  this  year  on  this  island. 

June  18.  Six  thousand  six  hundred  and  fifty-one  seals  were  taken 
at  the  close  of  this  day  on  St.  Paul  Island,  and  651  seals  had  been 
taken  to-day  in  violation  of  the  President's  order  (duly  posted  here 
June  13  last),  yet,  in  spite  of  that  order,  the  killing  was  continued  in 
violation  of  it,  as  follows:  June  20,  119  seals;  June  25,  215  seals;  June 
29,  400  seals;  July  8,  100  seals;  July  13,  121  seals;  July  15,  122  seals; 
July  21,  177  seals;  July  27,  248  seals;  August  3,  118  seals;  August  5, 
407  seals;  August  10,  100  seals;  November  2,  31  seals;  November  9, 
37  seals;  November  14,  142  seals;  November  19,  188  seals;  November 
21,  2  seals;  November  24,  133  seals;  November  25,  102  seals;  Novem- 
ber 29,  162  seals;  December  5,  3  seals. 

Or  a  total  of  9,579  seals  taken,  3,579  of  which  were  taken  by  the 
lessees  in  open  flagrant  violation  of  the  law  and  order  of  the  President 
of  the  United  States  (dated  June  15),  and  posted  in  advance  on  the 
islands  June  13,  1891. 

July  1.  1,548  seals  were  taken  at  the  close  of  this  day  on  St.  George 
Island,  being  48  seals  in  excess  of  the  limit  ordered  by  the  President, 
duly  posted  here  on  June  15  last;  yet  in  spite  of  that  order,  this 
killing  of  seals  was  continued  in  violation  of  it,  as  follows:  July  3,  30 
seals;  July  6,  119  seals;  July  16,  54  seals;  July  20,  54  seals;  July  24, 
72  seals;  July  25,  181  seals;  August  1,  26  seals;  August  6,  15  seals; 
August  13,  83  seals;  August  17,  55  seals;  September  24,  36  seals; 
October  23,  104  seals;  October  28,  25  seals;  November  23,  71  seals; 
November  23,  26  seals. 

Or  a  total  of  2,461  seals  taken,  960  of  which  were  taken  by  the 
lessees  in  open  flagrant  violation  of  the  law  and  order  of  the  President 


48  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

of  the  United  States  (dated  June  15),  and  posted  in  advance  on  the 
islands  June  14,  1891. 

The  above  certified  daily  entry  of  killing,  as  made  on  the  official 
journals  of  the  agents  of  the  Government  hi  charge  of  the  Seal  Islands 
of  Alaska,  show  that  the  lessees  with  the  connivance  and  permission 
of  the  United  States  Government  agents  whom  they  suborned  took 
12,040  seals,  or  4,540  seals  in  excess  of  their  right  to  do  so,  and  in  open 
flagrant  violation  of  the  law  and  regulations. 

The  daily  killing  records  are  published  on  page  203  of  the  (Report 
of  Fur  Seal  Investigations,  part  1,  1898)  Treasury  Document  2017, 
published  by  order  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  June,  1898. 
The  record  of  the  posting  of  the  President's  order  restricting  all  kill- 
ing on  the  islands  to  7,500  seals  for  the  entire  season  of  1891,  as  given 
above,  is  found  in  Report  of  Special  Agents,  House  Committee  on 
Commerce,  Aug.  31,  1913,  page  128. 

The  motive  for  this  criminal  trespass  by  the  lessees  as  above  related 
was  that  those  4,540  illegally  taken  skins  brought  them  an  average  of 
$60  per  skin,  or  $272,400,  which  was  net  gain  to  them.  They  took 
nothing  after  the  order  of  the  President  was  posted  except  the  very  finest 
young  3  and  4  yew  old  seals  that  hauled  out,  and  they  took  every  one  of 
them  that  did  haul  out  up  to  the  close  of  this  season  of  1891 . 

It  now  becomes  in  order  to  show  by  an  exhibit  taken  from  the 
official  records,  the  sworn  testimony,  and  authentic  letters, 
relation— 

Charles  NaaeL  as  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor ; 

Geo.  M.  Bowers,  as  United  States  Commissioner  of  Fisheries ; 


David  Starr  Jordan,  as  chairman  Advisory  Fur  Seal  Board ; 


Valter  I.  Lembkey,  as  chief  special  agent  in  charge  of  seal  islands ; 


Isaac  Liebes,  president  N.  A.  C.  Co.,  lessees,  and  his  associate  lessees; 

Jos.  Stanley  Brown,  dual  agent  of  the  Government  and  lessees, 
had  and  have,   to  this  unlawful  and  complete  destruction  of  the 
fur-seal  herd  of  Alaska. 


To  do  so,  briefly,  clearly,  and  faithfully  as  to  truth  of  record,  I 
have  prepared  the  following  statement,  which  I  submit  as  Exhibit  III ; 
all  citations  of  the  records  and  sworn  testimony  have  been  carefully 
verified,  and  will  stand  as  made. 


EXHIBIT  III. 

A  certified  list  of  120,000  yearling  sealskins  taken  by  the  lessees 
of  the  Seal  Islands  of  Alaska  between  1896  and  1910,  in  op  en  self-con- 
fessed violation  of  the  law  and  the  regulations  governing  their  con- 
tract, said  illegal  work  being  done  in  combination  with  certain  sworn 
agents  of  the  Government  whose  duty  was  to  prevent  it. 

Said  agents,  instead,  connived  with  said  lessees  and  enabled  this 
illegal  and  ruinous  slaughter  to  be  made  annually  from  1896  to  1910. 

And  tin's  illegal  and  ruinous  slaughter  and  criminal  trespass  by  the 
lessees  l  upon  the  fur-seal  herd  of  Alaska  was  duly  pointed  out  to 
Secretary  Oscar  Straus  in  detail  December  19, 1906,  again  on  May  18, 
1908,  again  on  December  7,  1908,  and  repeated  in  detail  to  Secretary 
Charles  Xagel  April  26,  1909,  again  May  9,  1910,  and  again  May  24, 
1910.  All  of  said  detailed  specific  charges  and  proof  of  this  illegal 
and  ruinous  killing  were  ignored  and  evaded  by  said  Straus  and 
NageL 

ANALYSIS  OF  THE  STATUTES  WHICH  GOVERN  THE  CONDUCT  OF  KILLING 
AND  TAKING  FUR  SEALS  ON  THE  PRIBILOF  ISLANDS,  BERING  SEA, 
ALASKA,  FROM  1869  TO  1913,  INCLUSIVE. 

March  4.  ISfiQ.  Public  resolution  declaring  the  Pribilof  group  of 
seal  islands  are  a  Government  reservation. 

July  1,  ;f870.  Act  ordering  a  lease  made  for  20  years  of  the  seal 
islands — 1870-1890.  It  places  the  entire  control  of  the  killing  and 
taking  of  fur  seals  in  the  hands  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  only 
fixing  a  maximum  limit  of  100,000  seals  annually  and  prohibiting  the 
killing  of  female  seals  and  seals  less  than  one  vear  old.  (See  Hearing 
Xo.  10,  pp.  462-463.) 

May  1.  1S90.  Lease  of  1870-1890  expires;  new  lease  for  20  years — 
1890-1910;  no  change  in  act  of  1870  made  which  permits  this  renewal 
of  said  lease  to  highest  bidder,  and  reserves  complete  control  for  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  as  to  killing  and  taking  seals.  (See  Hearing 
Xo.  10,  pp.  466-467.) 

May  14T  1896.  Secretary  Carlisle  orders  "no  yearling  seals  or  seals 
having  skins  weighing  less  than  6  pounds"  killed.  Posted  on  the 
islands  June  17,  1896.  (See  Report  of  Agents  of  House  Committee 
on  Commerce,  Aug.  31,  1913,  pp.  75,  76.) 

Mny  1.  1004.  "Hitchcock  rules"  ordered  to-day  bv  Secretary  of 
Commerce  and  Labor,  who  does  not  know  of  the  existence  of  the 
''Carlisle  rules"  of  1896,  and  which  have  been  ignored  by  all  officials 
and  the  lessees  since  the  day  they  were  posted  in  1896. 

1  A  conspiracy  is  a  continuing  offense,  according  to  the  United  States  Supreme  Court.  Two  men  who 
were  the  agents  in  bringing  the  Pennsylvania  Sugar  Refining  Co.  within  the  power  of  the  Sugar  Trust, 
which  kept  the  refinery  idle  for  years,  sought  to  escape  punishment  for  their  part  in  a  conspiracy  to  re- 
strain trade  and  establish  a  monopoly  by  pleading  the  statute  of  limitations.  That  act  would  have  run 
against  the  inception  of  the  conspiracy,  and  the  trial  judge  held  that  they  could  not  be  tried.  But  the 
Supreme  Court  holds,  very  rationally,  that  the  statute  does  not  protect  them,  for  they  continued  their 
conspiracy  in  restraint  of  trade  within  the  statutory  period.— Philadelphia  Record,  December  14, 1910. 

2158&— 13 4  49 


50  FUK-SEAL  HEED   OF   ALASKA. 

These  "Hitchcock  rules"  prohibit  the  taking  of  "any  seals  under 
2  years  of  age,  and  having  skins  weighing  less  than  5  5  pounds." 
(Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  482,  483.) 

March  9.  1906.  The  "Metcalf  rules,"  ordered  to-day,  change  the 
5^-pound  minimum  weight  of  the  Hitchcock  rules  to  5  pounds; 
otherwise  no  change  is  made  in  the  order  of  the  same.  (See  Hearing 
No.  10,  p.  483.) 

April  21.  1910.  Act  repeals  leasing  section  of  act  of  1870;  other- 
wise does  not  change  the  full  control  hitherto  given  the  Secretary  of 
Commerce  and  Labor  to  govern  by  regulations  the  seal  killing  on  the 
islands,  etc.  (See  Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  480-481.) 

February  29.  1912.  Chief  Special  Agent  Lembkey,  in  charge  of  the 
seal  islands,  swears  that  the  regulations  of  the  department  bind  him 
not  to  kill  seals  "under  2  years  of  age"  and  that  they  are  in  effect, 
to  wit: 

Mr.  MADDEN.  If  they  were  killed  it  would  be  a  violation  of  law. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  would;  if  the  regulations  permitted  it,  however,  it  would  be  in 
accordance  with  existing  law. 

It  should  be  remembered  also  that  the  law  does  not  prohibit  the  killing  of  any  male 
aeal  over  1  year  or  12  months  of  age,  although  regulations  of  the  department  do  prohibit 
the  killing  of  anything  less  than  2  years  old,  or  those  seals  which  have  returned  to  the 
islands  from  their  second  migration. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  That  is  a  regulation  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Of  Commerce  and  Labor;  yes,  sir.     (Hearing  No.  9,  p.  373.) 

A  list  of  128,000  yearling  sealskins  taken  on  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska 
by  the  lessees  thereof  during  the  term  of  their  lease  from  May  1,  1890,  to 
May  1,  1910. 

One  hundred  and  twenty  thousand  of  these  one  hundied  and 
twenty-eight  thousand  yearling  seals  have  been  taken  in  open, 
flagrant  violation  of  the  Carlisle  rules  of  May  14,  1896,  and  the 
Hitchcock  rules  of  May  1,  1904,  which  rules  of  the  Treasury  and 
Commerce  and  Labor  Departments  have  the  force  of  law. 

These  120,000  sealskins,  itemized  in  Elliott's  list,  are  the  skins  of 
"small  pups"  and  "extra  small  mips,"  as  listed  in  the  sales  at  Lon- 
don, each  and  every  one  of  which  has  been  measured  there  and 
certified  to  the  trade  there  as  being  less  than  34  inches  long,  and,  so 
certified,  sold  upon  that  certification  as  to  its  size  and  class  as  a 
"small  pup"  or  "extra  small  pup." 

These  measurements  of  the  London  sales  classification  are  ad- 
mitted by  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  as  being  absolutely  accurate. 

Under  oath,  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  agent  and  man  who  has  takei 
all  the  skins  with  the  cooperation  of  the  lessees  on  the  Pribilc 
Islands  since  1899  up  to  1910 — this  agent  admitted  that  a  yearling 
sealskin  of  his  own  identification  and  measurement  as  such  was  36  ^ 
inches  long.  (See  Hearing  No.  9,  pp.  442,  443.  Apr.  13,  1912*". 
H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  of  Com.  and  Labor.) 


FUE-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


51 


INVESTIGATION  OF  FUR-SEAL  INDUSTRY  OF  ALASKA. 

COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 
DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Tuesday,  July  11,  1911. 

The  committee  met  at  10.30  o'clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman) 
presiding. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  have  some  questions  to  ask.  A  great  deal  has  been  said  before 
the  committee  about  the  illegal  killing  of  seals  on  these  islands,  and  I  have  therefore 
requested  Prof.  Elliott  to  make  out  a  statement  of  what  he  considers  a  proper  estimate 
of  such  illegal  killing  in  the  last  20  years  of  the  lease.  I  told  him  to  make  the  estimate 
year  by  year,  and  to  submit  it  to  the  committee,  and  he  has  this  statement  here.  I 
will  ask  you,  Prof.  Elliott,  to  take  it  up  and  discuss  it  with  the  committee,  and  I  do 
this  upon  the  theory  that  if  the  lessees  were  guilty  of  any  illegal  killing  of  seals,  or 
were  guilty  of  bringing  this  herd  to  partial  destruction,  that,  under  the  securities  that 
are  lodged  with  the  Government,  as  I  understand  it,  they  ought  to  make  good  what- 
ever they  did  in  the  way  of  injury  to  the  Government  by  any  violation  of  the  law, 
administration  orders,  or  the  provisions  of  the  lease.  I  want  the  witness  to  state  as 
an  expert  how  many  such  killings  of  seals  there  may  have  been,  and  what  he  con- 
siders has  been  the  injury  done  to  the  Government  during  the  last  20  years. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Chairman.  I  will  read  the  statement  in  detail: 


MEMORANDUM,   FOR  HON.   JOHN  H.  ROTHERMEL,   IN  RE  SEAL  SKINS  TAKEN  BY  LESSEES 

IN    VIOLATION    OF   LAW. 

•urn  numbers  of  yearling  seals  taken  in  violation  of  law  by  the  North  American 
Commercial  Co..  or  lessees  of  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska.  Figures  taken  from  the  sale* 

hyues  of  ^fessrs.  C.  M.  Lampson's  Sons,  London,  during  period  of  lease  held  by 
the  X.  A.  C.  Co.  aforesaid. 


Total 
skins 
taken. 

Year- 
lings. 

Total 
skins 
taken. 

Year- 
lings. 

1890 

20.310 

3,823 

1901 

22,672 

13,000 

1891 

13  473 

1  1  200 

1902 

22,304 

14,500 

1892 

7,554 

(i) 

1903 

19,  374 

15,600 

1893  

7,492 

w 

1904  

13,128 

6,500 

1894 

16,030 

1,400 

1905 

14,368 

6,918 

1895 

15  002 

2,200 

1906 

14,  478 

6,837 

1896  .       . 

30,004 

13,000 

1907.   .                  

14,888 

7,000 

1897 

20,  762 

8,000 

1908 

14,965 

6,500 

1898  

18,032 

4,000 

1909  

14,350 

7,000 

1899 

16  804 

3  500 

1900  2 

22'  473 

9  500 

Total 

354,  413 

128,478 

_ 

Modus  vivendi.       2  Standard  lowered  this  year  for  first  time  to  "5-pound  skins,"  or  "yearlings." 


HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 


JULY  10.  1911. 


Mr.  CABLE.  May  I  ask  one  question? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Certainly. 

Mr.  CABLE.  Is  it  now  against  the  law,  or  has  it  ever  been  against  the  law,  to  take  a 
seal  1  year  old?  May  I  ask  what  is  the  understanding  of  the  committee  on  that  ques- 
tion? I  want  to  get  "straight  on  it  myself.  Has  it  not  always  been  perfectly  legal  to 
take  seals  a  year  old  or  more  than  a  year  old? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  absolutely  true.  These  seals  are  taken  in  June  and  July, 
but  until  the  1st  of  August  following  no  one  can  tell  what  is  a  yearling  seal. 

Mr.  CABLE.  Then,  is  it  your  contention  that  this  list  you  have  read  is  based  on 
seals  that  are  killed  under  1  year  of  age? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT,  'i  hey  must  be  under  1  year  old.  If  you  kill  them  in  June  or  July, 
the  benefit  of  the  doubt  belongs  to  them.  If  you  kill  a  yearling  seal  on  the  9th  day 
of  July,  how  do  you  know  that  it  was  born  on  the  9th  day  of  July  a  year  ago? 

Mr.  CABLE.  I  am  not  a  seal  expert. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  nor  no  other  man  could  determine  that. 


52  FUR-SEAL  HEED  OF  ALASKA. 

Mr.  CABLE.  Do  you  claim  that  this  list  you  have  read  is  hasnd  upon  seals  that  are 
under  1  year  old? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Under  2  years  old. 

Mr.  CABLE.  Is  there  anything  illegal  in  killing  the  year-old  seals? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Not  if  you  know  it  is  a  year  old. 

Mr.  CABLE.  What  do  you  call  a  yearling  seal? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  A  yearling  seal  is  a  yearling  until  it  is  2  years  old. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  a  yearling  seal? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  A  yearling  seal  is  one  not  under  1  year  of  age  nor  over  2  years  of  age.- 
That  is  a  yearling.  You  can  not  get  away  from  that  definition.  A  yearling  is  a  year- 
ling until  it  is  2  years  old. 

Mr.  McGiLLicuDDY.  What  is  your  understanding  as  to  the  law  on  the  subject? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  law  does  not  allow  the  killing  of  a  seal  under  12  months  of  age. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  Under  2  years  of  age,  according  to  that  ruling  of  1904? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes,  sir;  I  put  that  in  the  department  rules  in  1904  to  stop  those 
butchers. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  Then,  it  is  agreed  on  all  sides  that  it  is  legal  to  kill  anything 
over  12  months  old? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes,  sir;  I  admit  that,  but  you  must  prove  it. 

That  this  killing  of  seals  under  2  years  of  a^v  was  in  violation 
of  law  and  the  regulations  is  admitted  under  oath  by  the  Bureau  of 
Fisheries  agent,  W.  I.  Lembkey,  who  has  killed  all  the  soals  under 
the  instructions  of  the  Treasury,  Commerce  and  Labor  Departments, 
and  Bureau  of  Fisheries  since  1899  to  date  of  July  7,  1913,  thus: 

On  page  372,  Hearing  No.  9,  he  testified  as  follows: 

"Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  What  do  you  call  a  yearling  seal?  Do  you  mean  a  seal  that 
is  12  months  old  and  no  more? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  A  yearling  seal,  in  the  island  nomenclature,  is  a  seal  which  has 
returned  to  the  islands  from  its  first  migration. 

"Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  It  may  be  more  than  12  months  old  then? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  may  be  more;  it  may  be  a  trifle  less. 

"Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  How  much  more  than  12  months  could  it  be? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  could  not  be  but  a  little  more,  because  all  these  seals  are  born 

during  a  period  of  3  weeks,  generally  speaking,  from  the  25th  of  June  to  the  15th  of 

July.     Now,  they  return  to  the  islands  in  a  mass  about  the  25th  of  July. 

•*  *  *  *  #  * 

"Mr.  MADDEN.  If  they  were  killed,  it  would  be  a  violation  of  law? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  would;  if  the  regulations  permitted  it,  however,  it  would  be 
in  accordance  with  existing  law. 

"It  should  be  remembered  also  that  the  law  does  not  prohibit  the  killing  of  any 
male  seal  over  1  year  or  12  months  of  age,  although  regulations  of  the  department  do 
prohibit  the  killing  of  anything  less  than  2  years  old,  or  those  seals  which  have  returnee 
to  the  islands  from  their  second  migration. 

"Mr.  TOWNSEND.  Tl^at  is  a  regulation  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Of  Commerce  and  Labor;  yes,  sir." 

He  testified  as  follows,  on  page  442,  Hearing  No.  9: 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey,  do  you  know  the  length  of  a  yearling  seal  from  it 
nose  to  the  tip  of  its  tail? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No,  sir;  not  offhand. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  never  measured  one? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Oh,  yes;  I  have  measured  one. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  no  record  of  it? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  a  record  of  it  here. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  is  its  length? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  length  of  a  yearling  seal  on  the  animal  would  be,  from  the 
tip  of  the  nose  to  the  root  of  the  tail,  39^  inches  in  one  instance  and  39^  in  another 
instance 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  And  41  in  another  instance.     I  measured  only  three." 
*  *  #  •*  #  *  # 

Also  on  page  443: 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  much  can  you  say  is  left  on  a  yearling  after  you  have  taken 
the  skin  off? 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  How  much  skin  is  left  after  you  have  taken  it  off? 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  53 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes,  sir;  after  they  remove  it  for  commercial  purposes  a  certain 
amount  is  left  on. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  stated  about  3  inches. 

<;Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  that  would  leave  a  yearling  skin  to  be  35  inches  long. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No;  if  it  was  39£  inches  long,  it  would  leave  it  36£  inches.  That 
is,  all  the  animal  from  the  tip  of  the  nose  to  the  root  of  the  tail  would  be  39£  inches 
long.  Three  inches  off  that  would  leave  36£  inches." 

On  the  13th  of  April,  1912,  while  Special  Agent  Lembkey  was 
testifying,  the  following  admission  was  made  by  him  that  he  knew 
that  the  London  measurements  of  the  skins  taken  by  him  on  the 
seal  islands  of  Alaska,  were  the  reliable  and  indisputable  record  of 
their  si/es.  and  that  the  weights  of  the  same  were  not,  to  wit: 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  You  might  make  a  yearling  skin  weigh  9  pounds  by  the  adding  of 
blubber,  yet  when  it  got  to  London  it  would  be  only  so  long  and  so  wide. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  : 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  And  of  course  it  would  develop  in  the  classification  when  the  skins 
would  be  exposed  for  sale. 
'    (Hearing  Xo.  9,  p.  447.  Apr.  13,  1912.) 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  the  question  to  this  witness? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  asked  if  he  does  not  know  that  the  sizes  are  established  by  meas- 
urements? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Just  answer  that  question.     Do  you  know  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  been  so  informed. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Do  you  doubt  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Oh,  no. 

(Hearing  No.  9,  p.  441,  Apr.  13,  1912;  Ho.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

The  fact  that  Charles  Xagel,  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
had  full  prior  knowledge  of  the  falsifying  of  these  skin  weights  into 
the  books  of  the  department  as  the  weights  of  2-year-old  male  seals 
when  in  truth  they  were  not,  is  fully  set  forth  in  the  following  records 
of  his  office,  to  wit,  and  also  that  he  was  confronted  with  the  indis- 
putable proof  of  the  fraud  by  the  lessees  in  giving  their  lease,  viz; 

17  GRACE  AVENUE,  LAKE  WOOD,  OHIO, 

December  19,  1906. 
Hon.  OSCAR  STRAI>. 

Secretary  Department  Commerce  and  Labor,   Washington ,  D .  ('. 

DEAR  SIR:  In  the  report  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor  recently  trans- 
mitted by  i he  President  to  Congress,  a  discussion  of  the  condition  of  the  fur-seal 
herd  of  Alaska  apjx-ars,  and  reference  is  made  to  the  report  of  E.  \V.  Sims,  who  made 
an  investigation  into  the  status  of  this  herd  last  summer. 

The  Secretary  repeals  the  words  of  Mr.  Sims,  and  says  that  the  fur-seal  herd  is 
rapidly  disappearing  as  the  result  of  pelagic  sealing;  he  also  adds  that  in  his  judgment 
the  "destructive  erfm  ,,f  this  method  of  taking  seals  has  not  been  fully  realized"— 
i.  e.,  by  anyone  uniil  this  season. 

•  The  Secretary  i.-  right  in  saying  that  this  herd  is  "rapidly  disappearing,"  but  is 
entin-ly  v/rong  in  saying  that  the  destructive  effect  of  pelagic  sealing  has  not  been 
fully  realized:  he  d •••  a  ii-n  seem  to  know  that  on  the  strength  of  my  showing  of  the 
full  «•  ft'en  Mi  p'daLfir  -  riling  under  existing  law  and  regulations  which  I  gave  to  the 
Ways  and  Means  Committee  of  the  Hous?  December  21,  1894,  that  that  committee  and 
the  House  to  .k  action  February  22,  1895.  to  suppress  and  put  the  pelagic  hunter  out 
of  business;  but  thi-  isible,  and  merciful  action  of  the  House  was  defeated 

in  th-    -  rn  agenl  -  rf  :;.-   ii  •vernment,  who  denied  this  dang?r  and  injury 

incidenl  to  P.  iairif  s  -aling,  claiming  that  the  rules  of  the  Bering  Sea  tribunal  were 
sufficient  to  aver 

Again  1  brought  this  danger  of  pelagic  sealing  forward  in  1898,  after  the  Jordan- 
Thompson  agreement  of  November  16,  1897,  had  utterly  denied  it.  Again  my  charges 
of  this  real  danger  were  officially  denied  by  sworn  agents  of  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment in  the  service  of  the  Treasury  Department  ?nd  indorsed  by  the  Secretary 
of  that  department  in  a  letter  dated  February  7,  1902,  addressed  to  the  chairman  of 
the  Ways  and  Means  C-nninittee  of  the  House. 

I  answered  this  erroneous  official  statement  of  Secretary  Shaw  by  making  an  exhibit 
for  the  committee  which  declared  that  bv  the  end  of  the  season  of  1907  the  male 


54  PUR-SEAL   HEED   OF  ALASKA. 

breeding  life  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  would  be  extinct.  (See  Kept.  Ways  and  Means 
Com.,  2303;  57th  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  pp.  4,  5.) 

The  committee  overruled  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  agreed  with  me;  it 
reported  and  passed  a  House  bill,  February  2,  1903,  which  would  have  put  an  end 
to  the  inhuman  and  indecent  business  of  the  pelagic  hunter  had  it  not  been  again 
defeated  in  the  Senate  by  a  false  statement  made  to  the  Senate  Foreign  Relations 
Committee  by  Senator  Fairbanks,  February  17,  1903,  who  assured  his  colleagues  that 
an  agreement  to  a  satisfactory  settlement  had  been  reached  in  the  Anglo-American 
Joint  High  Commission,  and  that  that  commission  would  publish  it  soon  after  it 
reconvened;  that  that  reconvention  would  take  place  soon  after  the  4th  of  March, 
1903;  hence  the  House  bill  was  not  necessary. 

I  knew  that  this  statement  of  Senator  Fairbanks  was  without  warrant  and  said  so  to 
his  colleagues  in  the  Senate  at  the  time,  but  the  sine  die  adjournment  on  March  4 
prevented  action,  and  so  this  second  attempt  to  suppress  the  pelagic  hunter  failed. 
And  it  failed  not  from  any  want  of  understanding  of  the  destructive  effect  of  pelagic 
sealing,  as  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor  says  existed  until  the  Sims  report 
of  1906  had  been  made.  Mr.  Metcalf  was  himself  a  member  of  the  Ways  and  Means 
Committee  in  1902,  when  I  gave  that  body  the  full  understanding  of  this  work  of 
pelagic  sealing,  and  he  was  also  a  member  when  I  again  reenforced  my  argument  of 
1902  with  figures  and  facts,  March  9-10,  1904. 

He  also  heard  my  indictment  of  the  excessive  land  killing  by  the  lessees  before  this 
committee  in  1904;  he  heard  it  denied  by  the  lessees,  and  only  partly  agreed  to  by 
the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  solely  on  the  strength  of  my  showing  March 
9-10,  1904,  did  the  department  pledge  to  the  committee  the  annual  reservation  of 
2,000  choice  young  male  seals  from  slaughter  by  the  lessees  on  the  Pribilof  Islands. 

On  the  26th  of  October,  1905,  the  agent  of  the  department  in  charge  of  the  seal 
islands  of  Alaska,  in  an  official  report  admits  that  my  charge  of  injury  through 
excessive  land  killing  by  the  lessees  is  correct.  (See  p.  81,  S.  Doc.  No.  98,  59th 
Cong.,  1st  sess.) 

On  page  33  of  Secretary  Metcalf 's  report  for  1906  he  tells  us  that  the  lessees  during 
the  season  of  1906  "took  14,643  fur-seal  skins,  including  281  skins  taken  during  the 
previous  season."  Then,  in  this  same  paragraph,  and  immediately  following,  he  says 
that  only  10,942  seals  were  killed  on  St.  Paul  Island  and  1,685  seals  were  killed  on 
St.  George  Island  during  the  season  of  1906.  This  analysis  which  he  makes  of  his 
own  figures  declares  the  fact  that  2.016  skins,  and  not  "'281  skins,"  came  over  into 
the  catch  of  1906  from  1905. 

The  significance  of  this  you  will  at  once  observe  when  you  understand  that  these 
2,016  skins  were  the  "food  seals,"  which  were  killed  in  October  and  November,  1905, 
and  still  more,  they  were  the  2,000  choice  young  male  seals  ordered  spared  and  sheared 
(not  branded)  in  June  and  early  July,  1905,  this  sheared  mark  having  entirely  disap- 
peared by  the  middle  or  end  of  September,  since  every  fur  seal  by  the  end  of  Septem- 
ber annually  completely  renews  it  own  hair — sheds  and  grows  it  anew  in  August  and 
September. 

That  this  is  not  even  faintly  understood  by  the  Secretary  is  plain,  for  in  the  next 
paragraph  he  proceeds  to  tell  us  that  "in  addition  to  the  branded  seals  reserved  for 
breeding  purposes,  4,724  small  and  1,944  large  seals  were  dismissed  from  the  drives 
as  being  ineligible  for  killing  under  the  department's  regulations." 

More  misinformation  with  regard  to  the  subject  can  not  be  put  into  fewer  words. 
Witness  the  following: 

I.  These  seals  were  not  branded;  they  were  sheared  instead,  in  June  and  early  July. 
Then  by  the  end  of  September  they  completely  lose  this  mark  of  reservation,  and 
each  and  every  one  of  them  that  hauls  out  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  during  October- 
November  is  killed  as  a  "food"  seal,  and  the  lessees  get  the  skins,  which  are  carried 
over  into  the  catch  for  the  next  season.     (See  the  official  proof  of  this  on  pp.  8,  64,  65, 
and  86  of  S.  Doc.  No.  98,  59th  Cong.,  1st  sess.) 

II.  These  "4,774  small"  seals  do  not  represent  in  fact  more  than  800  or  1,000  such 
seals.    Most  of  these  seals  have  been  recounted  over  and  over  again  as  they  were 
redriven  and  then  dismissed  during  the  season.     Some  of  them  have  reappeared  in 
this  fictitious  total  six  or  seven  times. 

III.  These  "1,944  large  seals"  were  the  sheared  and  spared  seals  of  1906  so  marked 
in  June  and  early  July.     Last  October  and  November  they  were  killed  as  they  hauled 
out,  as  "food  "  seals,  and  their  skins  will  appear  in  the  quota  or  catch  of  the  lessees  for 
1907,  if  these  men  are  permitted  to  kill  next  season. 

With  regard  to  the  report  of  Mr.  Sims,  I  shall  not  dwell  upon  the  many  obvious  and 
plain  errors  of  statement  and  conclusion  which  appear  in  it.  I  do  not  do  so  because 
he  admits  that  his  experience  in  the  premises  is  limited  to  a  short  week  on  the  seal 
islands  during  the  summer  of  1906.  No  man,  it  matters  not  how  great  his  inherent 
ability,  can  master  this  question  and  intelligently  discuss  it  with  so  little  experience. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF    ALASKA.  55 

With  the  single  exception  of  correctly  speaking  of  this  immediate  danger  of  com- 
plete extinction  of  the  fur-seal  herd  of  Alaska,  under  existing  conditions,  Mr.  Sims  is 
completely  at  sea  and  in  profound  error  over  everything  that  he  brings  into  conclusion 
and  recommends  in  his  report  of  August  31,  1906. 
Very  sincerely,  your  friend  and  servant, 

HENRY  \V.  ELLIOTT. 


DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY, 

Washington.  January  2,  1907, 
Mr.  H.  W.  ELLIOTT. 

11  dm,;  Avenue,  Lnken-ood,  Ohio. 

SIR:  I  have  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your  letter  of  the  19th  ultimo,  comment- 
ing upon  that  portion  of  the  Secretary's  last  annual  report  which  refers  to  the  Alaskan 
fur-seal  service,  and  to  thank  you  for  the  information  therein  contained. 
Respectfully, 

LAWRENCE  O.  MURRAY, 

Assistant  Secretary, 

No.  17  GRACE  AVENUE.  LAKE  WOOD,  OHIO, 

May  IS,  1908. 
Hon.  OSCAR  STRAIN 

Secretary  Commerce  and  Labor.  Washington.  D.  C. 

Di: AR  SIR:  On  the  19th  of  December,  1906.  I  addressed  to  you  a  letter  in  which  I 
pointed  out  to  you  certain  pronounced  errors  of  statement  made  in  an  official  report 
to  you  by  one  E.  W.  Sims  on  the  condition  of  the  fur-seal  herd  of  Alaska.  That  I  did 
so  was  fairly  imperative  on  my  part,  since  these  errors  of  statement  and  recommenda- 
tion, which  this  inexperienced  and  wholly  untrained  agent  made,  were  entirely 
subversive  of  the  truth,  and  most  injurious  for  those  public  interests  at  stake,  if  acted 
favorably  upon  by  you. 

On  the  2d  of  January.  1907.  I  received  an  official  acknowledgment  of  the  receipt  of 
that  letter  aforesaid,  with  the  simple  "thank  you  for  the  information  contained." 
That  acknowledgment  was  enough;  it  made  no  suggestion  of  an  error  in  any  statement 
on  my  part.  There  was  none,  and  I  knew  it  when  I  addressed  you. 

My  chief  protest  in  that  letter  was  against  the  grave  misstatement  by  Mr.  Sims,  who 
said  that  all  of  those  seals  ordered  spared  by  the  Hitchcock  rules  were  duly  "  branded," 
and  so  exempted  from  slaughter  ever  afterwards  by  the  lessees;  that  this  "branding" 
was  faithfully  done,  and  those  spared  seals  thus  permitted  to  live,  grow  up  into  breed- 
ing bulls  for  the  rookeries;  all  this  officially  and  explicitly  reported  to  you,  when  in 
fact  it  was  not  true. 

Therefore  I  described  to  you  the  manner  in  which  these  seals  were  not  branded — not 
one  of  them — and  how  they  were  sheared  instead.  How  this  sheared  mark  was  entirely 
lost  a  few  weeks  lai<T  when  the  seal  went  into  its  natural  annual  molt  and  renewed  all 
of  its  body  hair.  So  that  those  sheared  seals  thus  "branded"  in  June  and  July  and 
spared  then,  when  they  hauled  out  again  in  October  and  November  following  were 
without  any  mark  of  exemption  and  were  killed  then  by  the  lessees  as  "food"  seals; 
that  in  "this  manner  those  land  butchers  were  actually 'nullifying  the  regulations  of 
the  department,  which  Mr.  Sims  erroneously  declared  the  faithful  observance  of 
to  you. 

What  has  b.-en  the  result  of  this  truthful  and  clear  statement  on  my  part  to  you 
made  December  19.  1906?  What  has  been  done  with  regard  to  the  conduct  of  affairs 
on  the  islands  during  the  season  following? 

1  have  the  official  answer  of  the  agents — your  agents — now  in  my  hands.  It  is 
print.  ae  Document  No.  376,  Sixtieth  Congress,  first  session.  Since  I  have 

myself  officially  reported  to  my  Government  on  this  life,  and  as  I  have  so  reported 
up  to  <lut«-  that'  no  man  or  official  following  me  or  prior  to  my  work  has  thus  far  been 
able  to  successfully  impeach  the  entire  truth  and  sense  of  my  published  official  rec- 
!u  issl  and  in  1890  (Monograph  Seal  Islands  of  Alaska.  Government  Printing 
.  1881),  and    II.  DM.-.  No.  175,  54th  Cong..  2d  sess. ).  I  am  constrained  to  review 
reports  of  your  agents  for  the  seasons  of  1906-7,  inclusive.     That  review  is  here- 
with inclosed  for  your  information  and  use.     If  I  have  made  an  error  in  it  and  it  is 
publicly  presented  to  me.  I  will  be  most  happy  to  acknowledge  it;  but  I  desire  to 
say  that  I  do  not  believe  it  can  be  questioned  seriously  by  any  authority.     I  challenge 
the  correction  confidently. 


56  FUR-SEAL  HEED  OF  ALASKA. 

Your  agant,  Mr.  Lembkey,  has  no  warrant  or  even  the  shadow  of  authority  to  ignore. 
or  dispute  that  table  of  skin  weights  which  I  officially  published  on  page  81,  Mono- 
graph Seal  Islands  of  Alaska  in  1881.  He  can  not  and  will  not  be  permitted  to  set 
aside  in  this  idle  manner,  as  he  does  on  page  84,  Senate  Document  No.  37t>,  that 
long-established  and  standard  agreement  of  all  the  United  States  Treasury  agents, 
the  agents  of  the  lessees,  and  myself,  upon  these  skin  weights,  from  1872  up  to  1881; 
and,  still  more,  his  attempt  to  deny  that  record  so  officially  published  is  in  turn  flatly 
denied  by  the  life  and  growth  of  the  fur  seal  itself  to-day.  That  life  and  growth  has 
not  changed  one  hair's  breadth  from  its  order  when  I,  first  of  all  men,  accurately 
recorded  it  in  my  published  work— officially  recorded  it  in  1872-90,  inclusive. 

I  desire  to  say  that  it  is  with  great  reluctance  that  I  take  up  this  matter;  but  I  can 
not  let  any  officialism  of  to-day  reflect  ever  so  little  upon  my  own  of  yesterday  and 
which  I  shall  defend  against  all  ignorant  or  venal  criticism,  now  and  in  the  future, 
just  as  successfully  as  I  have  done  so  in  the  past.  I  refer  especially  to  the  "scientific  " 
vagaries  of  Merriam  and  Jordan  in  IS91  and  1896-7  and  the  venal  and  calumnious 
work  of  John  W.  Foster  before  the  Bering  Sea  Tribunal  in  1893. 

In  the  light  of  this  letter,  herewith  inclosed,  and  which  can  not  be  truthfully 
clouded  by  any  man,  it  must  be  clear  to  you  that  the  lessees  can  not  be  permitted  by 
you  to  safely  kill  a  seal  next  summer  on  the  Pribilof  Islands;  but  your  agents  can  be 
directed  to  permit  the  natives  to  kill  some  2,500  or  3,000  small  male  seals  for  food 
without  any  risk  to  mention  of  doing  injury  to  the  public  interests  concerned . 
I  am,  very  respectfully,  your  most  obedient  servant, 

II  I:NI;Y  \V.  ELLIOTT. 

The  back-room  officials  managed  to  keep  Mr.  Straus  very  quiet. — so 
quiet  that  Elliott  jogged  him  up  a  few  months  later,  thus: 

1232  FOURTEENTH  STREET.   X\V.. 

Washington,  D.  (?.,  December  7 1  1908. 

Hon.  OSCAR  STKATS. 

Secretary  Commerce  and  Labor. 

DEARSnt:  On  the  18th  of  May  last  I  addressed  a  letter  to  you.  in  which  I  called 
your  attention  to  the  salient  errors  of  statement  made  to  you  in  ihc  100(1-7  reports 
of  your  seal-island  agent,  as  printed  by  order  of  the  Secretary.  (S.  Doc.  Xo.  :->7(),  60th 
Cong.,  1st  s< 

In  this  letter  aforesaid  I  inclosed  a  published  review  of  that  work  of  your  agent. 
(Plain  Dealer,  Cleveland,  Ohio,  May  17,  1908.)  I  charged  the  lessees  in  this  article 
(as  inclosed)  with  the  violation  of  their  contract,  since  in  takirg  their  catch  for  1907 
they  had  killed  yearling  seals,  and  had  done  so  because  they  were  obliged  to  kill  them 
or  fail  to  get  the  15.000  skins  you  allowed  them  to  get  under  the  terms  of  the  Hitchcock 
rules.  Togetthem  they  have  openly  violated  those  regulations  of  the  department,  and 
the  inclosed  evidence  of  their  own  sales  agent  in  London  convicts  them  of  that 
charge — indisputably  convicts  them. 

Even  if  we  were  to  admit  for  sake  of  argument  on  this  score  ihat  Special  Agent 
Lembkey's  classification  01'  skin  weights  is  correct,  as  published  on  page  8-1.  Semite 
Document  Xo.  370,  above  cited,  even  then  this  London  classification  declares  iluit  at 
least  6,000  yearlings  were  killed  in  the  total  catch  of  last  season  (1908).  They  must 
take  these  yearlings  or  have  nothing — there  is  nothing  left .  That  is  the  fact .  and  these 
men  are  draining  the  very  dregs  of  that  life  up  there  to  get  the  quota  yon  allow  them  to 
have. 

Very  sincerely,  yours.  HENRY  AY.  ELLIOTT. 

Mr.  Straus  however,  growing  embarrassed  over  this  plain  and 
direct  offer  of  proof  of  fraud  in  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  put  up  the 
following  evasion  of  his  responsibility  in  the  premises;  he  issued  an 
executive  order  transferring  the  whole  business  into  the  hands  of 
the  Hon.  Geo.  M.  Bowers,  as  the  directly  responsible  agent  of  the 
Government,  to  wit : 

DECEMBER  28,  1908. 

To  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries,  the  agents  charged  with  the  management  of  the  seal 
fisheries  in  Alaska,  and  others  concerned: 

By  virtue  of  the  authority  vested  in  me  by  the  Revised  Statutes  of  the  United 
States,  sections  1973  and  161,  and  by  the  organic  act  creating  this  department,  ap- 
proved February  14,  1903,  it  is  hereby  ordered  that,  subject  to  the  direction  of  the 
head  of  the  department,  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries  shall  be  charged  with  the 
general  management,  supervision  and  control  of  the  execution,  enforcement,  and 


FUK-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  57 


administration  <>1'  the  knvs  relating  to  the  fur-seal  fisheries  of  Alaska;  that  the  uir 
charged  %\ith  the  management  of  the  seal  fisheries  of  Alaska,  together  with  "such 
other  person*?  in  the  employ  of  the  department  as  may  hereafter  be  engaged  in  the 
execution  of  the  said  laws,  shall  he  subject  to  the  immediate  jurisdiction  and  control 
of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries,  and  shall,  in  addition  to  the  duties  required  of 
them  by  law,  perform  such  other  duties  as  he  may,  with  the  approval  of  the  Secre- 
tary of  (  ominerce  and  Labor,  prescribe;  that  the  appropriations  for  "Salaries,  agents 
-  in  Alaska."  1908  and  1909,  "Salaries  and  traveling  expenses  of  agents 
;1  iisheries  in  Alaska."  1908  and  1909,  and  "Supplies  for  native  inhabitants, 
Alaska."  1908  and  1909,  shall  be  expended  under  the  immediate  direction  of  the 
Commissioner  of  Fisheries,  subject  to  the  supervision  of  the  Secretary;  and  that 
all  records,  papers,  files,  printed  documents  and  other  property  in  the  department 
appertaining  to  the  fur->-<>al  fisheries  «»t  Alaska  shall  be  transferred  from  their  present 
custody  to  the  custody  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries. 

OSCAR  S.  STRAUS.  Secretary. 

This  relieved  Oscar  Straus  from  answering  Elliott  directly,  and 
threw  it  upon  his  >um^sor.  Charles  Xagel,  who  appears  on  the  scene 
.•h  4,  1909. 

In  the  meantime  Mr.  Bowers,  finding  that  the  scent  was  growing 
pretty  strong  out  of  this  fraud  in  killing  seals,  persuaded  Secretary 
Straus  to  appoint  a  "high  scientific  advisory  hoard'1  on  fur-seal 
service,  so  that  troublesome  questions  of  citizens  like  Elliott  could 
be  "authoritatively"  answered.  Accordingly,  on  January  15,  1909, 
he  appointed  "Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan  (chairman),  Dr.  Leonhard 
Stejneger,  Di1.  C.  Hart  Merriam,  Hon.  Edwin  W.  Sims,  Mr.  Frederic 
A.  Lucas,  and  Air.  Charles  H.  Townsend"  as  "the  advisory  board, 
fiii'-seal  service."  All  the  men  named  promptly  accepted  this  appoint- 
ment, and  the  board  was  formally  commissioned  February  6,  1909. 
(See  Appendix  A,  pp.  S11-S13,  June  24,  1911,  II.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
L.) 

Mr.  Elliott  taking  due  notice  of  this  shift,  and  waiting  patiently 
until  the  successor  of  Secretary  Straus  had  been  in  office  long  enough 
to  get  his  hearings,  addressed  the  Hon.  Charles  Nagel  a  letter  covering 
specifically  the  subject  of  fraud  on  the  part  of  the  lessees,  as  follows: 

LAKE  WOOD,  OHIO,  April  26,  1909. 
Hon.  CHAS.  R.  XAGEL, 

Secretary  Commerce  and  Labor,  Washington,  D.  C. 

DEAR  SIR:  On  the  8th  of  May,  1908,  I  addressed  a  letter  to  your  immediate  prede- 
cessor, inclosing  a  copy  of  a  recent  publication  of  facts  over  my  own  signature.  In 
this  letter  I  urged  him  to  shut  down  that  work  of  the  lessees  on  the  seal  islands  of 
Alaska,  since  it  was  being  done  in  open  and  self-confessed  violation  of  the  regulations 
of  the  Government.  The  published  statements,  which  I  took  the  trouble  to  arrange 
and  present  in  this  responsible  manner  to  him,  demanded  that  action  from  him.  But 
he  took  none.  And  still  more,  he  did  not  even  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  my  letter 
aforesaid,  which  gave  him  this  information,  lacking  on  his  part  in  the  premises. 

However.  I  know  that  such  silence  is  the  common  refuge  of  that  particular  official- 
ism which  is  both  unable  and  unwilling  to  dispute  a  statement  of  fact  running  counter 
to  its  order.  But  I  simply  did  my  duty  in  the  premises,  as  a  good  citizen  should  do. 
.  it  is  both  my  duty  and  my  pleasure  to  renew  this  request  and  address  it  to 
you,  and  to  inclose  copies  of  the  publications  as  sent  to  Mr.  Straus  last  May.  Also, 
in  this  connection,  I  desire  to  add  that  on  December,  7  1908,  I  again  submitted  addi- 
tional figures  and  facts  to  Mr.  Straus,  in  a  letter  of  that  date,  which  declared  that  the 
lessees  had  again  violated  the  specific  terms  of  their  contract  during  the  season  of 
1908  by  killing  thousands  of  seals  specifically  prohibited  from  such  killing  by  the 
express  order  of  the  Hitchcock  rules.  To  this  letter  and  its  indisputable  serious 
charge  no  acknowledgment  has  been  made;  no  attempt  to  deny  its  statements  has 
been  even  hinted  at.  The  reason  for  that  silence  is  good.  The  truth  of  my  charge 
has  been  self-confessed  by  the  lessees  in  London. 

1  therefore,  on  the  strength  of  those  figures  and  facts  which  I  have  submitted  to 
the  department,  as  above  cited  (May  18  and  Dec.  7,  1908),  respectfully  renew 
my  request  that  this  work  of  the  lessees  be  wholly  suspended,  and  at  once.  I  do  so 


58  FUK-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 

in  the  clear  light  of  the  inclosed  statements  of  fact.  I  also  recommend  that  the  law 
which  bonds  and  binds  this  corporation  leasing  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska  be  enforced 
before  it  shall  be  too  late  to  reach  the  lessees  with  those  fines  and  penalties  ordered 
by  it  for  the  public  good. 

I  am,  very  respectfully,  your  friend  and  servant, 

HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 

Washington,  April  29,  1909. 
Mr.  HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT, 

Lakeivood,  Ohio. 

SIR:  This  bureau  has  received,  by  reference  from  the  department,  your  letter  of  the 
26th  instant,  in  which  you  invite  attention  to  the  condition  of  the  seal  herd  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands,  and  inclosed  clippings  on  the  same  subject  from  the  Cleveland 
Plain  Dealer,  together  with  your  comments  thereon.  Your  communication,  with  its 
inclosures,  has  been  placed  on  file. 

Very  respectfully,  GEO.  M.  BOWERS, 

Commissioner. 

These  specific  charges  thus  made  by  Mr.  Elliott  stirred  Secretary 
Nagel  to  appoint  a  special  "expert  investigator,"  one  Geo.  A.  Clark, 
who  was  urged  for  this  work  by  Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan.  This 
appointment  of  Clark  was  made  on  May  7,  1909  (see  pp.  819-820, 
Appendix  A,  H.  Com.  on  Exp.  Dep.  Com.  &  Labor).  Clark  went  to 
the  Pribilof  Islands;  made  his  report  September  30,  1909. 

In  this  report  (on  pp.  859,  851,  Appendix  A)  he  confirms  the  truth 
of  Elliott's  charges  in  re  killing  yearlings,  as  follows: 

The  yearlings  of  both  sexes  lor  the  season  must  number  about  12,000  each. 

This  question  of  the  proportion  of  the  sexes  surviving  to  killableand  breeding  age 
is  a  fundamental  one.  It  could  be  settled  in  a  very  few  seasons  by  such  regulation  of 
killing  for  the  quota  as  would  limit  it  to  animals  of  3  years  of  age  and  over,  leaving 
the  2-year-olds  untouched.  The  quota  would  then  rail  where  it  belongs,  on  the 
3-year-olds,  and  give  a  close  approximation  of  the  survivals  among  the  young  males, 
which  in  turn  could  be  applied  to  the  young  females.  This  v:as  the  method  used  in 
1896-97,  when  a  minimum  of  6  pounds  in  weight  of  skins  prevailed.  During  the 
present  season  and  for  some  seasons  past  a  minimum  of  •">  pounds  has  been  in  force, 
the  skins  taken  ranging  in  weight  all  the  way  from  4  to  1  U  pounds,  bringing  all 
classes  of  animals  from  yearlings  to  4-year-olds  into  the  quota. 

The  result  of  this  manner  of  killing  is  that  we  have  no  clear  idea  from  the  quota  of 
the  number  of  younger  animals  belonging  to  the  herd.  From  the  irregularity  of  the 
movements  of  the  yearlings  of  both  sexes  and  the  2-year-old  cows,  they  can  not  be 
counted  or  otherwise  accurately  estimated  on  the  rookeries. 

^  With  this  proof  of  the  truth  of  Elliott's  charges  in  his  hands,  Mr. 
Secretary  Nagel  actually,  on  May  9,  1910,  again  renews  the  same 
killing  orders  of  1909,  and  again  sends  this  guilty  agent,  Lembkey, 
up  to  kill  13,000  seals  during  June  and  July,  1910. 

Lembkey  kills  12,920  seals  in  1910,  and  then  when  put  under  oath, 
April  13,  1912,  before  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  the 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  he  admits  that  7,733  of  them 
are  the  skins  of  yearling  seals,  taken  by  him  in  open,  flagrant  violation 
of  the  law  and  regulations  which  he  was  compelled  to  quote  and 
confess  that  he  had  full  knowledge  of  at  the  time  he  was  busy  in  this 
malfeasance!  (See  pp.  372,  429,  434,  441,  442,  443,  446,  447,  Hear- 
ing No.  9.  Feb.  29,  April  13,  1912,  House  Committee  on  Expendi- 
tures in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor.) 

There  is  nothing  ambiguous  or  indefinite  in  Mr.  Elliott's  letter  of 
April  26,  1909,  above  quoted.  Mr.  Nagel  was  a  lawyer  of  long- 
established  practice  and  fully  grasped  the  sense  and  point  of  Elliott  s 
indictment,  but  he  made  no  reply.  Thinking  it  possible,  however, 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  59 

0 

that  he  had  not  boon  specific  enough,  and  to  put  Mr.  Xagel  beyond 
doubt  as  to  his  meaning,  Elliott  again  addressed  Nagel  as  follows: 

LAKEWOOD,  OHIO,  May  9,  1910. 
Hon.  CHARLES  NAGEL, 

Secretary  Commerce  and  Labor. 

DEAR  SIR:  The  reason  why  a  new  and  competent  audit  of  the  seal-island  books  must 
be  made  in  your  department*  and  why  it  is  demanded  imperatively  for  the  public  good, 
is  as  follows,  briefly  stated: 

I .  The  law  has  been  openly  \iolated  on  the  killing  grounds  of  the  islands,  and  the 
terms  of  the  lease  ignored  by  the  lessees  thereof  at  frequent  intervals,  and  repeatedly, 
from  July  17.  18907  up  to  the  close  of  the  season  of  1909.     This  violation  of  the  law 
and  the  contract  has  been  chiefly  by  the  act  of  killing  female  and  yearling  male  seals; 
said  killings  have  not  been  in  negligible  numbers,  but  have  run  up  into  the  tens  of 
thousands  of  female  and  yearling  male  seals. 

II.  This  illegal  and  improper  killing  has  been  ordered  by  the  lessees,  and  falsely 
certified  into  your  department  as  the  taking  of  male  seals  according  to  law  and  the 
rules  of  your  department. 

III.  The  full  and  complete  proof  of  this  illegal  killing  as  specified  above  exists  on 
the  islands  and  in  the  records  of  the  sales  of  those  skins.     Any  competent  and  honest 
auditor  of  those  records  will  lay  them  open  and  so  disclose  the  truth  of  those  charges 
as  made  in  Items  I  and  II. 

Very  truly,  yours,  HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

Giving  Mr.  Xagel  full  tune  to  answer  and  knowing  w^ell  why  he 
did  not  answer,  Elliott,  on  May  24,  1910,  closed  this  record  made  as 
above,  of  timely,  courteous  warning  to  high  officials  of  fraud  practiced 
in  their  names  on  the  seal  islands,  by  sending  the  following  square 
charge  of  the  same  to  Charles  Xagel,  Secretary,  to  wit: 

LAKEWOOD,  OHIO.  May  24,  1910. 
Hon.  ('HAS.  XAGEL. 

'ary  Commerce  and  Labor,  Washington,  D.  C. 

\R  SIR:  As  a  good  citizen  and  being  possessed  of  abundant  knowledge,  based 
upon  indisputable  fact.  I  addressed  a  letter  dated  December  18.  1906.  to  your  imme- 
diate pred<"'i-s.sor.  Hon.  Oscar  Straus.  In  this  letter  to  him  I  specified  certain  grave 
and  inexcusable  errors  of  official  reports  made  to  him  by  his  subordinates  and  cer- 
tain specific  acts  of  official  malfeasance  by  the  same,  in  re  conduct  of  the  public 
business  on  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska. 

On  the  2d  of  January.  1907.  I  received  a  single  acknowledgment  of  the  receipt  to 
this  letter,  above  cited,  with  "thanks  for  the  information  contained  ";  but  taking 
notice  of  the  fact  that  in  spite  of  the  indisputable  truth  of  my  charges  and  propriety 
of  prompt  reform  to  be  made  by  him  in  the  premises,  Mr.  Straus  had  made  no  move 
to  do  s  >.  again  I  addressed  a  cautious  letter  May  18,  1907,  to  him,  in  which  I  renewed 
those  charges  and  request  for  reform.  To  this  letter  I  have  never  received  even  that 
perfunctory  acknowledgment  which  was  the  entire  return  for  my  first  one. 

Of  coinse  I  know  why  it  was  not  answered — that  subordinate  officialism  was  guilty 
as  indicted.  It  pigeonholed  my  letters;  yet  I  had  charity  for  Mr.  Straus.  I  knew 
how  hard  it  i-  for  one  in  his  position  to  get  at  the  truth  so  I  quietlv  gathered  an  addi- 
tional statement  of  fact  bearing  on  this  guilty  officialism  aforesaid,  and  again  on  Decem- 
ber 7.  1908.  I  addressed  a  letter,  courteously  but  firmly  renewing  my  charges  and 
request  that  he  put  an  end  to  this  malfeasance  specified. 

Did  I  receive  an  answer?  Xo.  Why?  Because  that  guilty  officialism  again  silently 
pigeonholed  my  letter,  since  it  convicted  and  dismissed  certain  officers  if  acted  upon. 

Mr.  Straus  went  out  of  office  March  4,  1909.  You  succeeded.  Knowing  that  you 
could  not  have  any  definite  knowledge  of  this  fur-seal  business  under  your  direction, 
except  as  you  gathered  it  from  this  same  guilty  officialism  aforesaid,  I  addressed  you 
in  turn  a  letter  dated  April  26,  1909,  exposing  that  malfeasance  under  your  hand.  On 
the  29th  following  your  perfunctory  acknowledgment  of  its  receipt  came  to  me. 

But  to  this  day  no  attempt  has  been  made  since  by  you  to  answer  its  grave,  explicit, 
and  indisputable  charges  of  official  malfeasance  on  the  part  of  your  subordinates.  Of 
course  there  is  good  reason  for  this  silence  on  the  part  of  that  officialism  thus  indicted. 
It  is  LMiilty.  But  yet  what  are  you  sworn  to  do  in  the  premises? 

On  "the  9th  instant  I  have  addressed  to  you  a  final  brief  of  this  malfeasance  on  the 
part  of  your  seal-island  subordinates.  Will  continued  silence  on  your  part  vindicate 
them? 

Very  truly,  yours.  HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 


60  FUK-SEAL  HEED   OF   ALASKA. 

Taking  full  notice  of  the  fact  that  the  Hon.  Nagel  did  not  intend  to 
recognize  the  facts  in  the  premises,  Mr.  Elliott  rearranged  the  salient 
items  of  fraud  in  re  of  the  lessees  and  mailed  them  on  July  12, 
1909,  to  President  Taft,  as  follows,  to  wit: 

The  President  wants  nothing  but  the  facts— he  will  attend  to  nothing  else,  coming 
from  anyone,  no  matter  how  close  that  person  may  be  to  him  personally.  (News 
item.) 

BRIKF. 

Analysis  of  the  sworn  official  evidence  which  John  Hay  transmitted  to  Congress 
in  1902'  which  convicts  the  lessees  of  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska  of  gaining  their  lease 
from  the  Government,  on  March  12.  1890.  by  fraud  and  perjury,  and  which  is  self- 
confessed  in  tnis  publication  by  those  lessees  aforesaid. 

This  proof  is  detailed  in  the  testimony  given  to  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee 
of  the  House  of  Representatives  by  Henry  W.  Elliott,  on  January  14,  20:  and  28, 
1907.  (Said  testimony  is  found  in  the  record  of  that  fur-seal  hearing  given  to  Mr. 
Elliott  by  that  committee  on  those  dates  and  duly  preserved  on  the  files.) 

Respectfully  submitted  for  the  information  and  the  use  of  the  President  by  Henry 
\V.  Elliott.  July  12,  1909. 

MEMORANDUM    FOR    THK    PRESI  DKXT    INf    RE    FUR-SEAL    FRAUDS. 

The  evidence  which  has  been  sent  in  to  Congress  by  John  Hay  that  convicts  the 
lessees  of  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska  of  fraud  and  perjury  March  12,  1890.  in  securing 
their  lease  from  the  Government,  is  found  as  follows: 

In  February.  1890,  Secretary  \Vindom  invited  bids  for  the  renewal  of  the  lease  of 
the  seal  islands  of  Alaska,  saicUease  to  run  from  May  1,  1890,  20  years. 

On  February  20.  in  the  presence  of  the  agents  and  representatives  of  the  bidders 
for  this  lease,  he  opened  nine  proposals.  These  bids  were  all  carefully  scheduled 
and  referred  by  the  Secretary  to  a  board  of  survey,  composed  pf  three  chiefs  of  divisions 
in  the  Treasury  Department.  This  board  was  directed  to  report  to  the  Secretary 
the  best  bid  offered  as  above  stated  for  the  Government  to  accept. 

This  board  of  survey  found  that  the  bid  of  the  North  American  Commen  ial  Co,, 
of  San  Francisco.  Cal.,  was  the  best  for  the  public  and  so  reported  to  Mr.  Windom. 
This  finding  was  unofTicially  made  known  to  the  bidders,  and  the  Secretary  informed 
the  president  of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co..  Isaac  Liebes,  that  on  the  12th 
of  March  this  lease  aforesaid  would  be  awarded  1 1  him  then  if  he  appeared  at  the  Treas- 
ury Department  at  that  time  and  complied  with  the  stipulations  and  regulations 
demanded  by  law  and  the  department. 

Mr.  Liebes  appeared  as  desired  and  above  cited.  Mr.  Windom  then  said  to  him 
that  he  had  been  credibly  informed  by  good  authority  that  Mr.  Liebes  and  his  asso- 
ciate bidders,  in  the  name  of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co..  were  owners  of 
pelagic  hunting  schooners  and  interested  in  the  buying  and  selling  of  fur-seal  skins 
taken  at  sea.  If  that  were  true  then  Mr.  Windom  said  that  he  had  a  plain  duty  to 
perform  and  would  throw  out  the  bid  of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co. 

President  Liebes  replied  that  this  charge  that  he  and  his  associates  then  owned  a 
pelagic  hunting  schooner  or  schooners  or  were  then  interested  in  the  buying  and 
selling  of  pelagic  skins  was  not  true.  He  said  that  he  and  his  associates  had  disposed 
of  all  their  interests  in  pelagic  sealing  vessels  and  skins  and  came  into  this  bidding 
entirely  clean  and  free  of  any  association  with  or  interest  in  that  business  of  pelagic 
sealing  as  charged. 

Secretary  Windom  then  told  him  that  he  (Liebes)  must  make  oath  to  that  declara- 
tion; that  if  he  did  so  then  this  lease  aforesaid  would  be  duly  awarded  to  the  North 
American  Commercial  Co. 

Mr.  Liebes  replied  and  said  that  he  was  then  ready  to  do  so;  and  he  did  so  in  the 
presence  of  the  Secretary;  and  the  several  chiefs  of  division,  who  formed  the  Board  of 
Survey7,  as  above  stated.  This  oath  having  been  duly  made  and  recorded,  Mr.  Windom 
then,  on  March  12,  1890,  formally  executed  the  lease  and  awarded  it  to  the  North 
American  Commercial  Co.  aforesaid.  (See  pp.  142-143,  H.  Doc.  No.  175,  54th  Cong., 
2d  sess.) 

When  Mr.  Isaac  Liebes  swore,  on  the  12th  day  of  March,  1890,  that  neither  he  nor 
any  of  his  associates  in  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.  owned  pelagic  hunting 
vessels  or  were  interested  in  the  business  of  pelagic  sealing,  on  that  day  and  date 
aforesaid  he  committed  deliberate  perjury,  and  by  so  doing  he  secured  that  lease  from 
the  Government,  as  above  da-cribed,  in  a  fraudulent  manner. 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA.  61 

The  official  sworn  proof  of  this  perjury  aforesaid  is  found  in  the  following:  Report 
on  the  foreign  relations  of  the  United  States.  1902,  Appendix  t.  etc.,  sent  info  Con- 
by  John  Hay.     This  Appendix  I  is  also  published  as  House  Document  Xo.  1, 
fifty-seventh  Congress,  second  session. 

On  page  203  of  this  House  Document  Xo.  1  aforesaid  is  the  sworn  official  oath  of  sole 
ownership  of  the  pelagic  hunting  schooner  James  Hamilton  Lems,  executed  January  10, 
1890,  by  Herman  Liebes,  the  partner  of  Isaac  Liebes  and  associate  member  and  director 
of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.  aforesaid. 

This  record  of  the  ownership  of  the  James  Hamilton  above  cited,  in  the 

name  of  Herman  Liebes,  associate  incorporator  and  director  of  the  said  Xorth  Amer- 
ican Commercial  Co.  (with  Isaac  Liebes,  D.  O.  Mills,  and  Lloyd  Tevis),  stands  with- 
out change  on  the  books  of  the  L'nited  States  customhouse,  office  of  the  collector  of 
the  port.  S-ITI  Francisco.  Cal.,  as  quoted  above,  up  to  September  17,  1890.  Then  this 
sealing  schooner,  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  is  sold  by  H.  Liebes  to  H.  Liebes  & 
ihat.  then,  this  said  vessel  stands  on  the  collector's  books  as  the  prop- 
erty of  Herman  and  Isaac  Liebes.  (See  p.  320,  "Exhibit  A,"  H.  Doc.  Xo.  1,  aforesaid.) 

then  and  thereafter,  up  to  July  29,  1891,  this  sworn  proof  of  the  ownership  of  that 
vessel,  as  above  cited,  stands  without  change;  but  on  this  date  a  bill  of  sale  is  made 
of  that  vessel  by  H.  Liebes  &  Co.  (Inc.)  to  Max  Waizman.  etc.  (See  p.  120.  Exhibit  A, 
H.  Doc.  Xo.  1,  57th  Cong.,  2d  » 

Thus  the  State  Department,  in  this  form  and  time,  sends  the  proof  clear  and  undis- 
putable  to  Congress  that  Isaac  Liebes,  president  of  the  Xorth  American  Commer- 
cial Co.,  of  San  Francisco,  Cal.,  did,  on  the  12th  day  of  March,  1890,  utter  fraud  and 
perjury  in  the  presence  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  William  Windom;  that  by 
said  utterance  he  fraudulently  secured  the  lease  of  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska,  as  above 
stated,  from  the  Government. 

HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

JULY  12.  1909. 

All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted  on  this  12th  day  of  July,  1909,  for  the  informa- 
tion and  the  use  of  the  President  of  the  United  States. 

HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

The  President,  after  studying  them,  on  July  29,  1909,  sent  them 
to  Secretary  Xagel  for  examination  and  report,  and  on  the  6th  of 
August  following  Elliott  finally  was  recognized  as  follows: 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY, 

Washington,  August  6,  1909. 

SIR:  The  receipt  is  acknowledged,  by  reference  from  the  President,  of  your  commu- 
nication  of  the  12th  ultimo,  in  which  you  make  certain  charges  against  the  Xorth 
American  Commercial  Co.  in  connection  with  its  lease  of  the  seal  islands. 

In  reply  you  are  advised  that  your  letter  and  the  statements  contained  therein  will 
receive  proper  consideration. 

Respectfully.  OR  MS  BY  McHARG, 

Assistant  Secretary. 
Mr.  HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT, 

17  Grace  Avenue,  Lakeu'ood,  Ohio. 

Did  Secretary  Nagel  ever  make  any  " examination7'  into  these 
grave  charges  and  official  proof  cited  of  the  truth  of  them?  Not  a 
line  has  ever  been  put  upon  the  files  of  his  office  which  declares  that 
he  did  so,  but  he  did  authorize  a  newspaper  scout  named  Gus  Karger 
to  publish  the  following  improper  and  untruthful  statement,  to  wit: 

I.  S.-crotary  Xagel  has  instructed  them  (the  officials  of  the  United  States  Fish 
Commission )  to  pay  no  attention  to  his  (Elliott's)  charges.     *    *    ' 

II.  Elliott  has  made  charges  against  James  G.  Blaine,  John  Hay,  and  Charles 
•r.     *    *    *    He  has  also  made  charges  against  Hon.  John  W.  Foster.     * 

III.  He  (Elliott)  was  thrown  almost  bodily  out  of  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee 
on  account  of  getting  into  a  controversy  thero  with  the  Hon.  \Sereno  Payne,  the  chair- 
man. 

IV.  HP  u-f-d  to  be  an  authority  20  years  ago,     *    *    *    but  he  is  now  ge; 
somewhat  confused.     *    *    * 

The  officials  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  have  a  most  intense  dislike  for  this 
man  *  *  *.— (Cincinnati  Times-Star,  A  us.  :5<>,  1909.) 


62  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

The  last  effort  made  by  Charles  Nagel  as  Secretary  of  Commerce 
and  Labor  to  shield  these  guilty  lessees  and  his  own  subordinates 
from  exposure  and  punishment  is  found  fully  made  in  the  following 
letter  to  Hon.  Wesley  L.  Jones,  chairman  Senate  Committee  on 
Fisheries.  Mr.  Nagel  deliberately  uses  a  series  of  " loaded"  skin 
weights  to  deceive  Senator  Jones,  thus: 

FEBRUARY  23,  1911. 
Hon.  WESLEY  L.  JONES, 

United  States  Senate,  Washington,  D.  C. 

SIR:  I  have  the  honor  to  acknowledge  receipt  of  your  letter  of  the  10th  instant, 
inclosing  a  communication  to  you  from  Henry  W.  Elliott  relative  to  the  sealskins 
taken  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  during  the  season  of  1910.  Mr.  Elliott  sends  you  a 
memorandum  giving  certain  data  which  he  wishes  you  to  believe  were  taken  from 
the  Fur  Trade  Review  for  February,  1911,  showing  that  8,000  skins  out  of  the  12,920 
sold  in  London  in  December  last  were  taken  in  violation  of  the  regulations  of  the 
department. 

Mr.  Elliott's  statements  relative  to  fur  seals  and  the  fur-seal  question  have  for  many 
years  been  characterized  by  reckless  extravagance.  As  long  ago  as  1886  the  governor 
of  Alaska  in  his  official  report  to  the  President  of  the  United  States  for  that  year  (p. 
22)  said: 

"The  fact  is  either  Mr.  Elliott  entertains  a  mistaken  idea  of  the  duty  he  owes  to  his 
employers  (the  Alaska  Commercial  Co.,  by  whom  I  am  unwilling  to  believe  him 
prompted  in  his  persistent  misrepresentations  of  Alaska  and  her  people),  or  else  he 
must  be  governed  by  a  malicious  hatred  of  the  people  of  this  Territory,  among  whom 
he  is  chiefly  noted  on  account  of  the  colossal  impediment  with  which  his  veracity 
seems  to  be  afflicted.  It  is  incomprehensible  why  the  statements  of  this  man  under 
the  circumstances  should  be  accepted  by  committees  of  Congress  in  matters  pertaining 
to  a  Territory  he  has  not  seen  for  a  dozen  years  in  preference  to  those  of  officers  of  the 
Government  who  are  on  the  ground  and  sworn  to  faithfully  and  conscientiously  guard 
the  interests  committed  to  their  care." 

The  memorandum  of  Mr.  Elliott  states: 

"On  pages  61  and  62  of  the  New  York  Fur  Trade  Review  for  February  1911, 
is  the  following  official  classification  of  the  sale  made  December  16  last  of  the  fur- 
seal  skins  taken  as  above  cited,  to  wit: 

78  "smalls,"  or  3-year-olds 1\  to  8  Ib.  skins 

793  large  pups,  or  "short"  3-year-olds  and  "long"  2-year-olds 6|  to  7  Ib.  skins 

3,775  "middling  pups"  or  "short"  2-year-olds  and  "long"  yearlings.  5|  to  6  Ib.  skins 

6,195  "small  pups"  or  yearlings 4|  to  5  Ib.  skins 

1,809  "ex.  sm.  pups"  or  "short"  yearlings 3^  to  4  Ib.  skins 

270  (not  well  classified). 

It  is  believed  that  you  will  be  interested  in  learning  that  the  foregoing  figures,  sub- 
mitted by  Elliott  as  being  contained  in  the  issue  of  the  Fur  Trade  Review,  do  not 
appear  therein  but  have  been  deliberately  supplied  for  the  purpose  of  influencing  you 
and  the  members  of  your  committee.  The  Fur  Trade  Review  article  gives  a  detailed 
statement  of  the  sales  of  sealskins  in  London,  but  differs  from  the  Elliott  quotation 
thereof  in  the  following  particulars,  as  you  may  readily  ascertain  by  consulting  the 
publication:  (1)  The  official  record  of  the  sales  of  the  various  sizes  of  sealskins  shows  a 
material  difference  from  Elliott's  figures,  of  which  not  a  single  one  is  correctly  given; 
(2)  The  official  statement  contains  no  reference  whatever  to  the  ages  of  the  seals,  and 
all  the  ages  inserted  in  Elliott's  alleged  quotation  are  fictitious;  and  (3)  the  printed 
record  makes  no  mention  whatever  of  the  weights  of  the  skins,  all  the  figures  given  by 
Elliott  being  supplied  by  him  for  his  own  purposes. 

As  you  are  doubtless  aware,  the  trade  designations  of  the  sealskins  ("smalls,"  "large 
pups,"  "small  pups,"  etc.)  have  no  reference  to  the  actual  ages  of  the  seals.  Thus, 
the  term  "small  pups"  include  seals  2  years  old  whose  skins  weigh  over  5  pounds  and 
less  than  6  pounds,  while  the  term  "large  pups"  is  applied  to  skins  that  weigh  over  6£ 
pounds. 

For  your  information,  there  is  appended  hereto  a  statement  received  from  Messrs. 
Lampson  &  Co.,  of  London,  dated  November  9,  1910,  by  which  firm  these  skins  were 
Bold,  showing  the  number,  weights,  and  classification  as  to  size  of  the  skins  to  which 
Elliott  refers.  These  weights  correspond  with  those  taken  on  the  islands  before 
shipment.  The  smallest  weights  reported  by  Lampson  are  4  pounds  10  ounces,  of  which 
weight  there  were  only  11  skins.  The  next  smallest  weight  thus  reported  was  4  pounds 
15  ounces,  or  within  1  ounce  of  the  size  prescribed  by  the  departmental  regulations, 
and  these  embrace  only  81  skin? ;  this  immaterial  underweight  was  due  to  the  excessive 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  63 

care  of  the  natives  in  removing  from  the  skins  every  vestige  of  fatty  tissue  for  food. 
There  were  thus  only  92  skins  which,  while  taken  in  conformity  with  law,  were  under 
the  limit  of  5  pounds  prescribed  by  the  department,  and  of  these  between  70  and  75 
per  cent  were  taken  for  food  purposes  by  the  natives  after  the  close  of  the  regular 
killing  season. 

When  the  possibilities  of  error  in  judgment  as  to  weight  of  pelts  not  yet  removed 
from  the  seals  and  of  unavoidable  accidents  incident  to  the  killing  of  thousands  of 
animals  are  considered,  the  wonder  is  that  there  are  so  few  undersized  animals  killed. 
The  results  indicate  careful  supervision  by  the  agents  and  also  accuracy  on  the  part 
of  the  clubbers. 

The  law  forbids  the  killing  of  seals  less  than  1  year  old  except  when  necessary  to 
secure  food  for  the  natives.  This  necessity  did  not  arise  in  1910,  and,  consequently, 
no  seals  under  1  year  old  were  killed  in  that  year. 

Respectfully,  CHARLES  NAGEL,  Secretary. 

To  heighten  the  meanness  and  deceit  employed  by  Secretary 
Nagel  in  the  foregoing  letter,  he  uses  a  retracted  and  self-confessed 
slander  uttered  by  "  the  governor  of  Alaska"  (A.  P.  Swineford)  .  The 
"  governor"  was  haled  before  the  House  Committee  on  Merchant 
Marine  and  Fisheries  to  answer  for  the  libel  above  quoted  by  Nagel, 
and  then  and  there  made  a  complete  and  full  retraction  01  it.  "  I 
have  been  misled  and  misinformed,"  he  told  the  chairman.  (See 
H.  Rep.  3883,  50th  Cong.,  2d  sess,  App.  A,  pp.  XXV-XXVIII.) 

And  furthermore,  and  in  proof  of  the  fact  that  Charles  Nagel, 
Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  was  specifically  informed  of  the 
illegal  and  improper  killing  being  done  on  the  Seal  Islands  of  Alaska 
under  his  authority  and  by  his  authority,  the  following  additional 
sworn  proof  of  that  guilty  knowledge  possessed  by  Mr.  Nagel,  is 
offered,  to  wit:  — 

EXHIBIT  A. 

LETTER   FROM    THE    COMMITTEE    OF   THE    CAMP   FIRE    CLUB    TO    SECRETARY   NAGEL. 

[Italics  ours.] 

BEDFORD  PARK, 
New   York  City,  May  10,  1910. 
Hon.  CHARLES  NAG  EL. 

Secretary  of  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 

Washington,  D.  C, 

SIR:  I  am  sorry  to  be  obliged  to  pursue  the  interests  of  the  fur  seal  any  further;  but 
a  recent  publication  of  news  from  Washington  compels  me  to  do  so. 

Closely  following  the  information  that  you  have  placed  the  seal  islands  in  charge  of 
the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  I  am  confronted  by  this  alleged  statement  by  Commissioner 
Bowers,  as  published  by  Mr.  Ashmun  Brown,  regular  correspondent,  in  the  Seattle 
Post-Intelligencer,  on  Sunday.  May  1: 
said  to-day: 


"  Certainly  there  will  be  no  wholesale  killing;  but  some  seals  in  the  herd  ought  to  be 
killed  from  time  to  time,  and  that  is  all  that  is  intended." 

To  all  those  who  know  that  the  situation  demands,  for  at  least  five  years,  a  complete 
cessation  of  all  seal  killing  on  the  Pribilof  Islands,  coupled  with  the  knowledge  that 
Commissioner  Bowers  and  his  advisers  on  the  fur  seal  hold  to  the  view  that  a  certain 
percentage  of  fur  seals  should  be  killed  each  year  —  "for  the  good  of  the  herd"  —  the 
publication  quoted  above  is  rather  startling.  I  would  be  glad  to  know  whether  Com- 
missioner Bowers  has  been  correctly  quoted,  and  also  whether  it  really  is  his  intention 
to  kill  seals  ''from  time  to  time.'' 

At  the  hearing  before  the  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation,  on  March  22,  I 
became  painfully  conscious  of  the  fact  that  Mr.  Lembkey,  who  is  one  of  Commis- 
sioner Bowers's  chief  advisers,  earnestly  desires  that  the  killing  of  seals  shall  go  on, 
and  that  evidently  it  was  through  his  advice  that  a  very  large  appropriation  was 
asked  for,  for  the  purchase  of  a  plant  which  would  facilitate  such  operations.  It 
Beemed  to  me  perfectly  evident  that  Mr.  Lembkey  is  anxious  to  have  the  job  of  super- 
intending the  killing  of  the  seals  on  the  islands;  and  therefore  I  regard  his  presence 
on  the  fur-seal  board  of  the  Fisheries  Bureau,  and  as  an  adviser  to  Fish  Commissioner 
Bowers,  as  dangerous  to  the  interests  of  the  fur  seal. 


64  FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

While  I  am  on  this  subject  I  desire  to  respectfully  call  your  aHeniiou  to  the  fact 
that  at  least  a  majority  of  the  advisory  board  of  ihe  fur-seal  service-  if  not  indeed 
the  whole  body — is  of  the  opinion  that  the  killing  of  surplus  male  seals  should  go  on 
to  the  extent  of  95  per  cent  each  year.  This  fact  is  fully  attested  in  recommendation 
.  No.  2,  as  adopted  on  November  23,  1909,  at  a  full  meeting  of  the  b  >ard.  You  will 
find  it  in  the  copy  of  the  recommendations  now  on  file  in  your  office.  The  advisory 
board  of  seven  persons  and  the  fur-seal  board  of  the  Fisheries  Bureau,  also  consisting 
of  seven  persons,  not  only  jointly  approved  the  making  of  a  new  killing  lease,  as  shown 
by  recommendation  No.  1,  but  also,  by  direct  implication,  approved  the  killing  of 
"95  per  cent  of  the  3-year-old  male  seals."  The  advisory  board  <  ompletely  failed 
to  recommend  a  close  season  for  the  fur  seals,  or  lor  any  restriction  on  commercial 
killing,  beyond  a  paltry  5  per  cent  per  annum  of  i ; 

In  view  of  the  present  situation,  1  respectfully  suggest  that,  because  of  his  personal 
interests  in  the  killing  of  fur  seals  for  commercial  purposes,  i!  is  to  the  interesi  of  the 
Government  that  Mr.  Walter  I.  Leinbkcy  be  dropped  from  the  fur-seal  board,  and 
that  Mr.  Henry  W.  Elliott,  of  Cleveland,  Ohio,  should  be  appointed  to  a  position  on 
the  advisory  board.  I  think  it  is  no  more  than  fair  that  among  the  14  persons  who 
hold  the  fate  of  the  fur  seal  in  their  hands  there  should  be  at  least  one  prrson  who  can 
represent  the  views  of  a  very  large  number  of  spoilsmen  and  naturalists  who  are  inter- 
ested in  seeing  the  fur-seal' industry  restored  by  the  most  thorough  and  expeditious 
methods,  but  whose  views  are  not  at  presen;  d  in  any  manner  whatsoever 

before  your  department. 

Yours   very  respectfully, 

W.  T.  HOUXADAY, 

( 'ftuirman,  etc. 

Mr.  Nagel  replies  deliberately  to  Dr.  lloriiaday  in  the  following 
letter,  which  is  both  arrogant,  and  insulting,  to  wit : 

EXHIBIT  B 
LETTER  FROM  SECRETARY  NAGEL  TO  THE  COMMITTEE  OP  THE  CAMP  FIRE  CLUB. 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY, 

Washington,  May  15,  1910. 

SIR:  I  have  read  your  letter  of  the  10th  instant  with  some  surprise.  As  you  know, 
you  have  been  given  the  fullest  opportunity  to  give  your  advice  as  to  the  management 
of  the  seal  herds  before  the  congressional  committees,  and  with  respect  to  the  par- 
ticular subject  which  you  now  have  in  mind  your  advice  was  not  accepted.  If  you 
had  not  had  the  opportunity  to  present  your  views,  and  urged  them  for  the  first  time 
now,  I  might  have  some  questions  as  to  the  propriety  of  my  course.  But  since  all  the 
phases  were  presented  to  the  committee,  and  Congress  by  unanimous  vote  charged 
me  with  the  responsibility  of  determining  what  should  be  done  by  way  of  killing, 
you  will  appreciate  that  I  must  regard  the  question  as  closed. 

I  may  add  that  as  far  as  I  know  there  are  only  two  persons  who  manifest  any  interest 
in  this  matter  and  who  differ  from  the  view  which  has  been  accepted  by  Com 
and  by  the  department.  I  have  reason  to  believe  that  members  of  the  Camp  Fire 
Club  who  have  had  an  opportunity  to  visit  the  islands  and  to  see  the  seal  herds — a 
privilege  of  which  I  believe  you  have  not  availed  yourself — entertain  views  directly 
opposed  to  yours.  In  fact.  1  would  be  glad  to  know  whether  you  are  writing  in  your 
own  person,  or  as  representative  of  the  club,  when  you  sign  yourself  as  chairman. 

Now,  Mr.  Hornaday,  you  have  considerable  responsibilities  in  your  official  employ- 
ment, and  I  shall  endeavor  not  to  molest  you.  I  hope  that  you  wrill  accord  me  the 
same  privilege  in  my  capacity.  I  always  welcome  advice;  I  do  not  fear  criticism; 
but  I  do  discourage  unnecessary  comment  upon  other  men  engaged  in  my  bureau 
who  are  charged  with  responsible  duties,  who  are  expected  to  be  loyal,  and  who  are 
not  in  a  position  to  defend  themselves.  I  regard  it  as  my  part  to  speak  up  for  them. 
Respectfully, 

CHARLES  NAGEL, 

Secretary. 
Mr.  W.  T.  HORNADAY, 

Chairman  Committee  on  Game  Protective  Legislation, 

The  Camp  Fire  Club  of  America. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  65 

This  threat  of  Mr.  Xagel  "to" molest"  Dr.  Hornaday  if  the  latter 
did  not  drop  this  business  of  looking  at  the  manner  in  which  those 
public  interests  were  being  destroyed,  did  not  prevent  Dr.  Hornaday 
from  continuing  that  observation,  for  the  following  answer  by  him 
was  quickly  made,  which  gave  Secretary  Xagel  full  knowledge  and 
ample  warning  of  what  he  might  expect  if  he  pursued  this  seal  herd 
with  illegal  slaughter,  to  wit: 

EXHIBIT  C. 
LETTER  FROM  THE  COMMITTEE  TO  SECRETARY  NAGEL. 

BEDFORD  PARK, 
New  York  City,  May  18,  1910. 
Hon.  CHARLES  XAGEL. 

Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor. 

DEAR  SIR:  Your  letter  of  May  15  in  reply  to  my  inquiry  regarding  the  accuracy 
of  the  published  interview  quoting  Commissioner  Bowers  as  saying  that  fur  seals  are 
to  be  killed  by  your  department  this  year  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  confirms  my  worst 
fears.  You  do  not  contradict  the  published  information  that  seal-killing  operations 
are  to  proceed  this  year  under  your  authority  and  direction.  You  and  the  friends  of 
the  fur  seal  are  now  literally  at*  the  parting  of  the  ways,  and  only  your  calmest  judg- 
ment can  save  you  from  making  a  very  grave  mistake/ 

If  the  English  language  has  any  meaning,  your  own  letter  clearly  indicates  that 
it  is  your  intention  to  go  on  killing  seals.  It  means  that  you  will  not  permit  the  harried 
herds  anything  in  the  nature  of  a  close  season.  You  say  that  my  advice  on  this  point 
"was  not  accepted.''  You  assume  that  Congress  agrees  with  you  regarding  the  con- 
tinued killing  of  seals,  and  you  say  that  you  "regard  the  question  as  closed." 

I  think  the  inclosed  printed  report  of  the  Camp  Fire  Club's  committee  on  game 
protective  legislature  will  show  you  whether  or  not  I  represent  the  Camp  Fire  Club, 
or  at  least  all  of  it  except  the  one  member  who  is  known  to  share  your  views. 

Your  implied  threat  to  me  if  I  pursue  this  matter  any  further  is  of  no  effect 
anywhere.  You  are  welcome  to  "molest"  me  if  you  can.  But  it  happens  that  I  am 
not  on  trial  in  this  matter  or  in  any  other.  I  do  not  write  you  now  to  threaten  you, 
but  only  to  give  you,  in  the  friendliest  spirit  in  the  world,  a  solemn  warning  not  to 
commit'an  act  that  will  be  a  grave  error.  If  you  have  read  the  newspapers  during  the 
past  three  months,  you  must  know  that  the  acts  of  even  a  Cabinet  officer  are  subject  to 
review  by  the  public  he  is  supposed  to  serve,  and  no  threats  of  yours,  either  expressed 
or  implied,  will  for  one  moment  deter  me  and  the  hundreds  of  strong  and  capable  men 
I  represent  from  holding  you  accountable  for  your  future  acts  regarding  the  fur  seal. 
We  do  not  propose  that  our  work  shall  be  nullified  in  the  manner  that  you  calmly 
propose. 

You  say  my  "views  were  not  accepted."     This  would  be  important  if  it  were  true. 

Why  did  President  Taft  send  a  special  message  to  Congress  to  provide  against  the 
making  of  a  new  killing  lease? 

To  stop  the  killing  of  the  fur  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands. 

Did  the  President,  or  did  Senator  Dixon's  committee,  or  the  United  States  Senate, 
intend  for  one  moment  that  you  should  go  right  on  in  the  bloody  killing  business 
without  a  halt? 

Xo!     A  thousand  times  no,  and  you  know  it! 

Was  it  not  partly  for  the  purpose  of  clearing  our  hands  of  fur-seal  blood  and  clearing 
the  road  for  treaties  by  the  State  Department  that  the  new  law  was  driven  through 
Congi' 

You  now  propose  to  nullify  the  whole  act,  and  set  up  Lembkey  in  the  killing  business 
in  place  of  the  X'orth  American  Commercial  Co. 

When  you  and  I  were  before  the  Senate  Committee  I  saw  clearly  what  was  in  Lemb- 
mind,  and  at  last  I  suspected  what  was  in  yours.     It  was  then  that  I  demanded 
of  you  a  positive  assurance  regarding  your  intentions,  some  proof  that  you  were  giving 
the  committee  a  square  deal.     And  what  did  you  reply? 

You  were  careful  to  give  no  assurance  whatever.  You  merely  shifted  uneasily  in 
vour  chair  and  said ,  "I  would  like  to  have  the  right  to  kill  seals,  for  I  think  it  would 
be  a  good  thing  to  hold  it  as  a  club  over  the  heads  of  the  pelagic  sealers,"  or  words  to 
that  effect. 

21588—13 5 


66  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

Now,  what  is  it  that  you  are  really  going  to  do? 

You  propose  to  use  the  bloody  club  on  the  seals  themselves  forthwith;  and  you 
propose  to  pay  good  Government  money  for  a  lot  of  old  junk  with  which  to  carry  on 
the  seal-slaughtering  business. 

I  tell  you,  Mr.  Secretary,  that  the  records  of  the  last  15  years  of  fur-^-ul  history  are 
black  with  official  blunders,  and  some  other  things  even  more  serious.  The  records  are 
all  accessible  for  publication,  if  necessary.  I  had  hoped  that  through  President  Taft's 
wise, prompt,  and  very  statesmanlike  initiative  a  new  era  had  dawned.  I  know  thatthe 
United  States  Senate  intends  that  there  shall  be  a  change  for  the  better,  and  I  know 
that  in  the  Senate  my  views  regarding  the  stoppage  of  seal  killing  just  now  are  accepted . 
If  you  doubt  it,  we  can  very  easily  have  that  question  decided  in  the  Senate  Chamber. 
I  warn  you  that  if  you  permit  any  seals  to  be  killed  on  those  islands  during  your  term 
of  office  it  will  be  a  breach  of  the  fa'th  that  has  been  reposed  in  you  by  the  Senate 
Committee  on  the  Conservation  of  National  Resources.  As  to  the  consequences  of 
this  course,  it  is  not  necessary  for  me  to  make  any  predictions  just  now. 
Yours,  very  truly, 

W.  T.  HOIJNAIIAV. 

Chairman  Committee  on  Game  Protective  Legislation  and  Preserves. 
Approved  by— 

JULIUS  H.  SEYMOI-K, 
Council  for  the  Camp  Fin-  club. 
MAY  18,  1910. 

This  vigorous,  square,  truth-telling  letter,  as  above  quoted,  of  Dr. 
Hornaday,  stung  Secretary  Nagel  into  the  following  answer,  which  at 
once  squarely  puts  him  in  the  light  of  having  full  knowledge  of  what 
the  nature  of  the  illegal  killing  he  was  about  to  perpetuate  was,  to  wit: 

EXHIBIT  D. 

LETTER   FROM    SECRETARY   NAGEL  TO   THE   COMMITTEE. 

DEPARTMENT  OP  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY, 

Washington,  May  33,  1910. 

DEAR  SIR:  I  have  read  your  letter  of  the  18th  instant.  It  is  apparent  that  further 
correspondence  will  not  aid  the  situation.  You  are  entitled,  however,  to  know  the 
position  of  the  department,  and  I  shall  endeavor  to  state  it  as  briefly  as  possible. 

That  pelagic  sealing  ought  to  be  stopped  is  admitted  by  everyone,  and  every  effort 
is  being  made  to  put  a  stop  to  this  brutal  and  uneconomic  practice.  So  far  nothing 
positive  has  been  accomplished.  You  are  of  the  opinion  that  in  the  meantime  the 
preservation  of  the  seal  herds  would  be  furthered  by  a  closed  season  upon  the  islands 
for  a  certain  number  of  years.  As  to  this  there  is,  to  say  the  least,  a  difference  of 
opinion.  Those  who  have  been  charged  with  the  responsibility  to  investigate  these 
conditions  advise  that  a  cessation  to  the  killing  will  only  play  into  the  hands  of  pelagic 
sealers.  They  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  killing  of  a  large  proportion  of  male  seals 
is  not  only  safe,  but  conduces  to  the  preservation  of  the  herd.  It  is  proposed,  for  the 
present,  to  proceed  upon  this  theory,  as  Congress  is  understood  to  have  contemplated 
when  the  new  law  was  enacted.  The  President  and  the  State  Department  are  fully 
advised  of  what  it  is  proposed  to  do.  I  think  it  right  to  inform  you  because  you  seem 
to  contemplate  steps  to  have  the  policy  of  this  department  reversed.  Inasmuch  as 
the  season  is  approaching,  any  action  of  that  kind  ought  to  be  taken  promptly. 

In  your  letter  of  the  10th  instant  you  said  that  "because  of  his  personal  interests 
in  the  killing  of  fur  seals  for  commercial  purposes  it  is  to  the  interests  of  the  Govern- 
ment that  Mr.  Walter  I.  Lembkey  be  dropped  from  the  fur-seal  board."  More  es- 
pecially because  of  the  use  of  that  language,  I  asked  you  whether  you  were  writing 
in  your  own  person  or  as  representative  of  the  club.  You  now  assure  me  that  you 
represent  the  club,  and  I  must  call  on  you  to  specify  your  complaint  against  Mr. 
Lembkey.  If  your  objection  is  based  merely  upon  a  difference  of  opinion  between  you 
and  Mr.  Lembkey  as  to  the  wisdom  of  killing  seals,  it  will  serve  no  purpose  to  discuss 
the  matter  further  with  me.  If,  however,  you  mean  to  say  that  Mr.  Lembkey  is 
disqualified  as  an  official  because  of  personal  or  financial  interests  in  the  killing  of  fur 
seals  for  commercial  purposes,  then  it  is  fair  that  he  should  be  notified  of  that  charge, 
and  that  the  department  should  be  advised  at  once  in  order  that  it  may  investigate. 
If  you  are  prepared  to  specify  so  that  this  matter  may  be  made  the  subject  of  an 


FUR-SEAL  HEED   OF  ALASKA.  67 

inquiry,  I  shall  be  obliged  to  have  you  do  it  promptly,  because  Mr.  Lembkey  is 
expected  to  leave  for  Alaska  in  the  near  future,  and  after  he  has  gone  it  will  be  diffi- 
cult to  make  a  change  or  even  to  communicate  in  time  to  take  action. 
Respectfully, 

CHARLES  NAGEL,  Secretary. 

Dr.  W.  T.  HORNADAY, 

Camp  Fire  Club  of  America,  New  York  City. 

P.  S. — Since  dictating  the  above,  Mr.  Bowers  has  shown  me  your  letter  to  him  of 
the  19th  instant.  You  make  serious  comments  upon  one  or  more  of  the  fur-seal 
experts  or  expert  advisers.  Of  course,  I  do  not  know  what  you  have  in  mind,  but 
inasmuch  as  these  advisers  occupy  positions  of  some  responsibility,  especially  at  this 
time,  it  is  of  great  importance  to  me  to  know  the  facts  just  as  promptly  as  possible, 
and  you  are  therefore  invited  to  put  in  my  possession  all  such  statements  as  you  may 
be  willing  to  give  that  will  enable  me  to  make  a  proper  inquiry. 

CHARLES  NAGEL,  Secretary. 

To  this  letter  asking  for  specific  charges,  Dr.  Hornaday  at  once  sent 
the  following  direct,  pointed  specifications,  to  wit: 

EXHIBIT  C. 
LETTER  FROM  THE  COMMITTEE  TO  SECRETARY  NAGEL. 

BEDFORD  PARK, 
New  York  City,  May  18,  1910. 
Hon.  CHARLES  XAGEL, 

Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor. 

DEAR  SIR:  Your  letter  of  May  15  in  reply  to  my  inquiry  regarding  the  accuracy 
of  the  published  interview  quoting  Commissioner  Bowers  as  saying  that  fur  seals  are 
to  be  killed  by  your  department  this  year  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  confirms  my  worst 
fears.  You  do  not  contradict  the  published  information  that  seal-killing  operations 
are  to  proceed  this  year  under  your  authority  and  direction.  You  and  the  friends  of 
the  fur  seal  are  now  literally  at  the  parting  of  the  ways,  and  only  your  calmest  judg- 
ment can  save  you  from  making  a  very  grave  mistake. 

If  the* English  language  has  any  meaning,  your  own  letter  clearly  indicates  that  it  is 
your  intention  to  go  on  killing  seals.  It  means  that  you  will  not  permit  the  harried 
herds  anything  in  the  nature  of  a  close  season.  You  say  that  my  advice  on  this  point 
"was  not  accepted."  You  assume  that  Congress  agrees  with  you  regarding  the  con- 
tinued killing  of  seals,  and  you  say  that  you  "regard  the  question  as  closed." 

I  think  the  inclosed  printed  report  of  the  Camp  Fire  Club's  committee  on  game 
protective  legislation  will  show  you  whether  or  not  I  represent  the  Camp  Fire  Club, 
or  at  least  all  of  it  except  the  one  member  who  is  known  to  share  your  views. 

Your  implied  threat  to  me  if  I  pursue  this  matter  any  further  is  of  no  effect  anywhere. 
You  are  welcome  to  "molest "  me  if  you  can.  But  it  happens  that  I  am  not  on  trial  in 
this  matter  or  in  any  other.  I  do  not  write  you  now  to  threaten  you,  but  only  to  give 
you,  in  the  friendliest  spirit  in  the  world,  a  solemn  warning  not  to  commit  an  act  that 
will  be  a  grave  error.  If  you  have  read  the  newspapers  during  the  past  three  months, 
you  must  know  that  the  acts  of  even  a  Cabinet  officer  are  subject  to  review  by  the  public 
he  is  supposed  to  serve,  and  no  threats  of  yours,  either  expressed,  or  implied,  will  foi1 
one  moment  deter  me  and  the  hundreds  of  strong  and  capable  men  I  represent  from 
holding  you  accountable  for  your  future  acts  regarding  the  fur  seal.  We  do  not  propose 
that  our  work  shall  be  nullified  in  the  manner  that  you  calmly  propose. 

You  say  my  "views  were  not  accepted."     This  would  be  important  if  it  were  true. 

Why  did  President  Taft  send  a  special  message  to  Congress  to  provide  against  the 
making  of  a  new  killing  lease? 

To  stop  the  killing  of  the  fur  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands. 

Did  the  President,  or  did  Senator  Dixon's  committee,  or  the  United  States  Senate, 
intend  for  one  moment  that  you  should  go.  right  on  in  the  bloody  killing  business 
without  a  half? 

No!     A  thousand  times  no,  and  you  know  it! 

Was  it  not  partly  for  the  purpose  of  clearing  our  hands  of  fur-seal  blood  and  clearing 
the  road  for  treaties  by  the  State  Department  that  the  new  law  was  driven  through 
Congress? 

I  respectfully  suggest  that  the  American  people  will  be  interested  in  knowing 
through  your  investigations  how  many  female  seals  and  very  young  seals  were  killed 
during  the  past  eight  years  when  on  outsiders  were  visiting  the  islands  to  observe 


68  FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 

and  report.  It  appears  to  be  a  fact  that  the  sales  of  skins  from  our  islands  have  slio\vn 
the  slaughter  of  many  yearling  and  pup  seals,  contrary  to  law.  Now,  who  is  to  blame 
for  permitting  that  slaughter? 

I  will  also  point  out  to  you  that  the  report  of  the  total  number  of  seals  surviving 
last  year,  as  made  to  you  by  Mr.  Clark  and  published  by  you,  is  manifestly  erroneous 
and  absurd  in  that  it  reports  a  number  of  living  seals  far  in  exec—  of  existing  fads. 
At  present  I  will  do  no  more  than  draw  you  attention  to  the  fact  (officially  published  ) 
that  on  December  17,  1903,  Mr.  Walter  I.  Lembkey  declared  to  his  chief  iii  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor  (Hon.  Frank  II.  'Hitchcock),  in  the  presence  of  Mr. 
Henry  W.  Elliott,  "that  at  the  close  of  the  season  of  1903,  August  I,  the  whole  num- 
ber of  fur  seals  alive  then  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  //v/s  not  to  exceed  150,000." 

Now,  Mr.  Secretary,  I  ask  you:  Where  is  the  man  of  intelligence  who  will  have 
the  hardihood  to  say  that  the  fur  seals  of  the  Pribilof  Islands,  harried  constantly,  as 
they  have  been  by  a  powerful  fleet  of  pelagic  sealers,  have  not  decreased  more  than 
10  per  cent  since  December,  1903?  Look  at  the  London  market  report-;  of  the  annual 
catches  of  the  pelagic  sealers  of  "Alaskan"  seals;  consider  that  according  to  your 
own  Mr.  Lembkey  two  seals  are  killed  and  lost  for  every  one  killed  and  secured  by 
the  pelagic  sealers;  then  decide  whether  you  think  the  total  number  of  seals  has  not 
enormously  decreased  during  the  past  seven  years.  And  yet  your  Mr.  Clark  has 
officially  reported  to  his  chief  that  the  seals  on  the  islands  "now  number  !<•-•>  than 
140,000"  (see  your  annual  report).  Why  should  "140,000"  be  suggested,  when  the 
real  figure  can  hardly  be  one-half  that1}  Was  it  not  to  deceive  you  into  thinking  (hat 
the  number  so  deftly  suggested  is  approximately  the  real  number  living?  I  claim  that 
it  was. 

Who  is  there  that  will  go  before  the  American  people  and  assert  that  there  are  now 
more  than  60,000  seals  belonging  to  our  islands,  except  the  men  who  wish  to  make  a 
living  by  killing  them?  That  there  were  only  14,336  killable  seals  on  the  islands 
last  year,  when  15, 000  were  desired,  is  very  significant. 

We  are  now  at  the  parting  of  the  ways;  for  I  see  clearly  that  you  and  the  Camp  Fire 
Club  of  America  do  not  agree  on  any  one  essential  point.  We  shall  feel  it  our  duty 
to  appeal  to  the  President,  asking  him  to  take  the  responsibility  of  directing  a  sup- 
pression of  hostilities  by  your  department.  We  shall  tell  him  that  when  you  were 
before  Senator  Dixon's  committee  that  committee  unsuspectingly  approved  your 
bill  (clothing  yourself  with  most  absolute  powers)  in  the  belief  that  no  seals  were  to 
be  killed  by  your  orders  in  the  immediate  future.  Fortunately,  it  was  first  promised 
that  you  should  have  $100,000  for  the  purchase  of  the  effects  of  the  North  American 
Commercial  Co.  Then  it  was  pointed  out  that  if  no  seals  were  killed  and  no  wages 
paid  the  natives  therefor  the  entire  support  of  the  natives  must  be  provided  by 
Congress. 

As  you  will  undoubtedly  remember,  and  as  the  records  will  show,  (here  exists 
abundant  documentary  prcof  of  this  fact.  It  was  your  Mr.  Lembkey  who  then  said: 
"Well,  gentlemen,  if  there  is  to  be  no  seal  killing  then  we  will  need  a  larger  appro- 
priation to  enable  us  to  take  care  of  those  natives."  Thereupon  some  one  finally  pro- 
posed $50,000  as  the  additional  amount  necessary  for  the  support  of  the  nat  i  ves  because 
no  seals  were  to  be  killed  by  them,  and  they  would  receive  no  wages  as  they  hereto- 
fore have  done.  The  $100,000  you  originally  proposed  was  then  and  there  increased 
to  $150,000  for  that  purpose.  It  was  appropriated  by  Congress,  promptly  and  cheer- 
fully, and  you  have  it  to-day. 

But  the  unquestionable  "gentleman's  understanding"  on  which  that  extra  $50,000 
was  granted  you  does  not  rest  on  my  memory,  nor  even  upon  the  stenographic  report 
of  the  hearing  before  the  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation.  What  the  committee 
expected  of  you  and  the  purpose  of  that  extra  $50,000  was  clinched  on  the  floor  of  the 
Senate  by  Chairman  Dixon  in  the  following  words,  explaining  kfSenator  Hale  why 
your  appropriation  was  to  be  so  large  as  $150,000: 

"But  in  the  meantime,  if  we  put  into  effect  the  closed  season,  these  Indians  will  be 
living  on  the  islands  with  nothing  to  live  upon,  with  no  physicians  or  schools;  and  in 
view  of  their  support  and  maintenance  temporarily,  until  the  killing  again  takes  place, 
the  Secretary  felt  that  the  Government  should  make  some  provision  to  take  care  01 
them  in  the  meantime."  (Congressional  Record,  Mar.  23,  1910,  p.  3655.) 

The  "Secretary"  referred  to  was  Hon.  Charles  Nagel,  Secretary  of  Commerce  and 
Labor,  who,  with  $50,000  to  his  credit  especially  to  enable  him  to  maintain  300  natives 
without  paying  them  wages  for  butchering  seals,  now  calmly  proposes  to  accept  the 
advice  of  the  evil  genius  of  the  fur  seal,  arid  go  right  on  with  killing  operations. 

As  indisputable  evidence  I  will  attach  to  this  letter  a  portion  of  the  Congressional 
Record  containing  Senator  Dixon's  exact  language. 

Now,  what  was  the  intention  of  President  William  H.  Taft,  when  he  penned  his 
special  message  to  Congress  in  behalf  of  the  fur  seal?  Here  are  his  exact  words,  as 
published  in  Senate  Document  No.  430,  March  15. 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA.  69 

"The  policy  which  the  United  States  has  adopted  with  respect  to  the  killing  of 
seals  on  the  islands  is  not  believed  to  have  had  a  substantial  effect  upon  the  reduction 
of  the  herd;  but  the  discontinuance  of  this  policy  is  recommended  in  order  that  the 
United  States  may  be  free  to  deal  with  the  general  question  in  its  negotiations  with 
foreign  countries.'  To  that  end  it  is  recommended  that  the  leasing  system  be  aban- 
doned for  the  present,  and  that  the  Government  take  over  entire  control  of  the  islands, 
including  the  inhabitants  and  the  seal  herds.  The  objection  which  has  heretofore 
been  made  to  this  policy,  upon  the  ground  that  the  Government  would  engage  in  pri- 
vate business,  has  been  deprived  of  practical  force.  The  herds  have  been  reduced 
to  such  an  extent  that  the  question  of  profit  has  become  a  mere  incident,  and  the  con- 
trolling question  has  become  one  of  conservation/' 

As  any  man  may  see  from  the  foregoing,  the  President  and  Congress  intended,  and 
still  do  'intend,  that  the  slaughter  of  fur  seals  on  our  islands  shall  immediately  cease! 
Just  when  they  will  be  willing  for  killing  to  be  resumed  is  a  question  that  the  future 
alone  can  determine.  Congress,  as  representing  the  people  of  this  Nation,  desires 
that  the  international  fur-seal  disgrace  shall  end  immediately,  and  that  blundering 
shall  cease.  The  good  intentions  of  the  President  and  Congress  are  entirely  beyond 
dispute.  They  accepted  your  bill  without  question;  and  they  gave  you  $50,000  for 
the  first  year's  maintenance  of  the  natives  who  no  longer  would  draw  wages  from  seal 
butchery.  They  even  gave  you,  most  generously,  and  almost  without  question, 
$100,000  with  which  to  buy  up  the  old  property  of  the  outgoing  lessees  —  old  junk,  we 
call  it  —  at  prices  to  be  fixed  by  your  representatives. 

All  this  was  done  in  the  belief  that  you  honestly  intended  to  take  the  first  and 
most  important  step  in  ending  the  great  scandal. 

We  warn  you  not  to  make  a  false  step  in  this  matter.  If  you  carry  out  your  present 
intention  blame  will  fall  heavily,  and  it  will  fall  upon  you  and  Commissioner  George 
M.  Bowers.  The  public  will  not  care  who  advised  you  two  to  break  faith  with  Congress 
or  who  '  '  concurs  "  in  it.  You  will  be  arraigned  on  the  floors  of  Congress  and  in  the  press 
of  America,  and  if  the  terms  of  your  arraignment  are  severe  you  will  have  only  your- 
self and  the  evil  genius  of  the  fur  seal  to  thank  for  it. 

The  moderate  tone  of  your  last  letter  has  made  me  feel  deeply  sorry  that  you  are 
being  led  by  blind  guides  into  a  totally  false  position,  and  one  which  quickly  will 
prove  very  hateful  to  you.  I  am  taking  all  this  trouble  to  warn  you  because  Senator 
Dixon  has  assured  me  that  at  heart  you  are  a  very  conscientious  man.  You  have 
not  followed  the  fortunes  of  the  fur  seal  for  30  years,  as  I  have.  You  are  depending 
upon  the  advice  of  men  who  are  giving  you  bad  advice  —  for  several  different  reasons. 
The  one  man  whose  advice  would  be  worth  most  to  you  —  Mr.  Henry  TV.  Elliott  —  is 
cordially  disliked  by  some  of  the  "fur-seal"  experts  whose  mistakes  he  has  merci- 
lessly exposed. 

If  the  Secretary  of  State  really  wishes  you  to  slaughter  seals  in  order  to  facilitate 
the  making  of  treaties  against  seal  slaughter  (?).  then  may  Heaven  help  his  "nego- 
tiations." for  assuredly  they  will  need  it.  In  the  well-nigh  annihilation  of  the  fur- 
seal  industry  the  Department  of  State  already  has  many  failures  to  answer  for,  and 
it  is  his:h  tune  for  those  failures  to  give  place  to  one  diplomatic  success. 
Yours,  very  truly. 

W.  T.  HORN  AD  AY, 
Chairman  Committee  on  Game  Protective  Legislation  and  Preserves, 

Camp-Fire  Club  of  America. 

Approv  ed  and  signed  by  — 

JULIUS  H.  SEYMOUR, 

Counsel. 

A.  S.  HOUGHTON. 
CHARLES  D.  CLEVELAND. 

^lAXHALL    Mr.LEAN. 

GEORGE  \\M.  BURLEIGH. 
B   GREELEY. 


Did  Charles  Xagel  attempt  to  answer  and  deny  those  specific 
charges  of  fraud  and  wrongdoing  put  up  to  him  in  the  above  responsi- 
ble and  authoritative  form  and  record  ?  Xo.  He  issued  his  orders 
as  usual  to  Walter  I.  Lembkey,  and  killed  in  the  following  June  and 
July  12,920  seals,  out  of  which  7,733  were  self-confessed  yearling 
seals  —  self-confessed  by  his  own  agent,  Lembkey.  (See  Hearing  Xo. 
9,  pp.  434,  435,  436-442,  443,  Apr.  13,  1913;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
C.  &  L.) 


70  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

In  conclusion,  and  cumulative  proof  of  this  charge  against  Charles 
Nagel  as  above  made  May  18,  1910,  is  the  following  letter  of  United 
States  Senator  Dixon,  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Conservation 
of  National  Kesources,  United  States  Senate,  who  exposes  the  fact 
that  he  has  been  deceived  by  Charles  Nagel  with  regard  to  this  very 
subject  of  Dr.  Hornaday's  letter  of  above  quotation,  to  wit: 

UNITED  STATES  SENATE, 
COMMITTEE  ON  CONSERVATION  OF  NATIONAL  RESOURCES, 

May  23,  1910. 

MY  DEAR  DR.  HORNADAY:  T  had  a  personal  talk  with  Secretary  Xagel  the  other 
day  regarding  the  matter  of  killing  some  of  the  male  seals,  and  after  he  had  explained 
to  me  the  circumstances,  I  felt  better  contented.  I  think  you  can  rest  assured  that 
the  killing  will  only  be  to  make  a  show,  with  the  understanding  that  this  move  is 
done  at  the  instance  and  request  of  the  State  Department,  in  order  to  cover  certain 
phases  of  the  international  treaty  negotiations,  which  Secretary  Nagel  says  are  now 
pending.  I  wish  I  could  quote  you  some  of  his  statements  made,  but  he  says  that  the 
understanding  between  Knox  and  himself  is  thorough  regarding  the  matter,  and  he 
feels  positive  that  he  is  pursuing  the  right  source  at  this  special  time. 

I  do  not  believe,  from  his  statement,  that  any  great  number  of  seals  will  be  killed, 
and  that  as  soon  as  the  pending  negotiations  are  settled  the  policy  of  killing  will  be 
reversed. 

Yours,  very  truly, 

Jos.  M.  Dixox. 
Dr.  W.  T.  HORBADAY, 
2969  Decatur  Avenue, 

Bedford  Park,  N.  Y. 

This  letter  of  Dixon  to  Hornaday  shows  that  Nagel  had  deliberately 
deceived  Senator  Dixon  as  to  his  intended  purpose  of  violating  the 
close  time  in  1910,  which  he  had  promised  the  Senate  Committee  on 
Conservation  of  National  Kesources  March  22,  1910,  he  could  order 
for  the  season  right  ahead,  and  for  which  close  time  he  received  $50,000 
from  the  committee  to  support  the  natives  during  the  year  in  that 
idleness  which  would  follow. 

Dr.  HORNADAY.  The  same  date;  that  is  to  say,  in  the  hearing  of  March  22,  1910 
[reading]: 

"Present:  Senators  Dixon  (Chairman),  Dick,  Jones.  Briggs,  Dillingham,  Guggen- 
heim, Heyburn,  Dolliver,  Clark  of  Wyoming,  Bankhead,  Overman,  and  Smith  of 
South  Carolina. 

"Hon.  Charles  Nagel,  Secretary  of  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor;  Solici- 
tor Charles  Earl;  George  M.  Bowers,  Commissioner  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries;  Dr. 
B.  W.  Everham,  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries;  Walter  I.  Lembkey,  agent  of  the  seal 
fisheries;  and  Dr.  W.  T.  Hornaday  appeared." 

The  first  appropriation  asked  for  by  Mr.  Nagel,  with  which  to  carry  out  the  terms 
of  the  bill  which  he  bad  drafted,  was  $100,000.  That  sum  was  to  be  used  chiefly  in 
buying  the  properties  and  paraphernalia  of  the  outgoing  North  American  Commercia" 
Co.,  in  order  that  with  that  paraphernalia  the  business  of  killing  seals  could  b( 
continued. 

In  behalf  of  the  Camp  Fire  Club  I  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  it  was  desirm 
that  the  killing  should  cease  for  a  time,  and  there  should  be  a  closed  season,  whicl 
we  demanded  should  be  10  years.  That  matter  was  discussed,  and  it  was  tacith 
agreed  upon  by  members  of  that  committee  that  there  should  be  a  closed  season,  am 
that  is  what  prompted  Senator  Dixon  to  use  the  expression  that  he  did.  Then.  sai( 
Mr.  Lembkey,  "Gentlemen,  if  there  is  to  be  a  closed  season,  we  must  have  mor< 
money;  we  must  have  money  with  which  to  support  those  natives  during  their  idle 
period."  I  will  read  to  you  the  words  that  I  wrote  down  at  the  time: 

"Well,  gentlemen,  if  seal  killing  has  to  stop,  we  will  have  to  have  a  larger  appi 
priation  in  order  to  support  those  300  natives,  whose  wages  will  stop." 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  You  are  quoting  Mr.  Lembkey  now? 

Dr.  HORNADAY.  Yes,  sir.  On  being  asked  how  much  more  he  thought  would  b( 
necessary  he  said,  "We  will  need  about  §50,000  more."  and  that  amount  was  agreec 
to  then  and  there,  for  the  purpose  of  supporting  those  idle  natives  whose  wages  wouh 
stop. 


PUR-SEAL   HERD   OF  ALASKA.  71 

Mr.  TOWXSEXD.  Tl  at  is  tl  e  explanation  Senator  Dixon  gave  to  Senator  Hale  when 
the  bill  came  in  with  ?150.000? 

Dr.  HORNADAY.  Precisely,  and  that  is  a  matter  of  record  in  the  records  of  Congress. 
-Now.  if  that  does  not  prove  an  understanding  that  seal  killing  should  stop,  then  the 
English  language  is  absolutely  worthless. 

Mr.  SEYMOUR.  And  t;  e  850.000  was  appropriated? 

Dr.  HORXADAY.  The  $50,000  was  appropriated,  and  Secretary  Nagel  sat  there  and 
accepted  it. 

Mr.  SEYMOUR.  For  the  express  purpose  of  taking  care  of  the  Indians  during  the 
closed  season? 

Dr.  HORXADAY.  Precisely,  and  for  no  other  purpose. 

Mr.  SEYMOUR.  And  Secretary  Xagel  heard  it  and  understood  it  and  agreed  to  it, 
did  he? 

Dr.  HORXADAY.  He  did.  and  he  has  the  money  now,  undoubtedly. 

Mr.  TOWXSEXD.  This  debate  that  you  introduced  in  your  testimony,  covering 
explanations  by  Senator  Dixon  to  Senator  Hale  as  to  why  this  $50,000  in  addition 
was  granted,  you  took  from  the  Congressional  Record? 

Dr.  HORXADAY.  Certainly,  and  from  no  other  source.  I  clipped  pages  from  the 
Record  itself.  I  did  not  quote  it.  (Hearing  No.  6,  pp.  267,  268,  July  27,  1911:  H. 
Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  and  L.) 

Secretary  Charles  Xagel  had  full  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  on 
March  9-10,  1904,  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor  pledged 
itself  to  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee  not  to  allow  any  seals  killed 
on  the  Pribilof  Islands  "  under  2  years  of  age/7  and  this  pledge  was 
also  given  to  the  Senate  subcommittee  in  charge  of  Alaskan  Affairs. 
(Gov.  Dillingham,  chairman,  on  Mar.  8,  1904.) 

Mr.  Frank  H.  Hitchcock  appeared  before  the  Ways  and  Means  Com- 
mittee on  March  9,  1904,  and  said  that  he  had  been  sent  to  represent 
the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  and  to  make  the  following  pro- 
posal to  the  committee.  On  page  35,  Hearings  on  Fur  Seals,  Ways 
and  Means  Committee,  Fifth-eighth  Congress,  second  session,  on 
House  Joint  Resolution  124,  appears  the  following: 

Page  35 : 

Mr.  HITCHCOCK.  First  of  all  we  propose  to  limit  still  further  the  ages  at  which  seals 
can  be  taken.  We  will  prohibit  altogether  the  killing  of  seals  under  2  years  of  age. 
We  will  also  prohibit  the  killing  of  seals  above  4  years  of  age.  Killing  will  thus  be 
restricted  to  seals  between  2  and  4  years  old. 

Page  36: 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  of  Mississippi.  You  propose  to  forbid  the  killing  of  seals  under 
2  years  old? 

Mr.  HITCHCOCK.  Yes. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS.  At  2  years  of  age  that  is  the  very  time  you  can  tell  the  difference 
between  the  bull  and  the  cow.  In  other  words,  if  you  kill  nothing  under  2  years  old 
there  should  be  no  reasonable  excuse  for  a  mistake  in  that  respect? 

Mr.  HITCHCOCK.  You  are  quite  right;  that  is  the  point.  The  great  objection  to  the 
killing  of  these  small  seals,  and  I  take  it  tl  e  only  objection,  is  the  difficulty  in  dis- 
tinguishing the  males  from  the  females. 

On  July  28,  1910,  Secretary  Charles  Xagel  received  from  the 
Bureau  of  Fisheries  a  marked  copy  of  the  above  hearing,  and  sends 
that  notice  of  this  reception  to  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures 
in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  June  24, 1911,  see  page  987, 
Appendix  A.  and  the  following  published  charges  had  also  been  sent 
to  Secretary  Xagel  as  early  as  June  26,  1909,  to  wit: 

MEMORANDUM  FOR  HON.  CHAS.  NAGEL. 

With  special  regard  for  the  subject  of  my  letter  to  you  of  April  26th  instant,  I  have 
published  the  following  to-day,  for  which  I  have  the  complete  warrant  and  proof  in 
hand. 

HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT, 
17  Grace  Avenue,  Lakewood,  Ohio. 
JUNE  26,  1909. 


72  FUK-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

CHARGES  MADE  ARE  RECORDS — PROF.  ELLIOTT  DECLARES  THEY  ARE  NOT  PERSONAL 
WITH  HIM — INVOLVE  QUESTION  OF  SEAL  SLAUGHTER — WHY  HE  TAKES  MATTER  UP 
WITH  THE  ATTORNEY  GENERAL. 

" Those  are  not  my  charges,"  said  Prof.  Henry  W.  Elliott,  when  questioned  Saturday' 
by  the  News  concerning  the  letter  he  sent  to  Attorney  General  Wickersham,  and 
which  was  published  in  the  News  Friday. 

"  The  charges  are  statements  of  official  record  and  sworn  affidavits  in  the  files  of  the  State 
and  Treasury  Departments  which  convict  and  order  the  punishment  of  those  men.  I 
have  merely  made  an  arrangement  of  them,  so  that  they  become  at  once  intelligible 
and  indisputable  in  their  showing,"  replied  Elliott.  "I  found  that  these  men  had 
gotten  into  complete  control  of  the  officialism  which  succeeded  John  Hay  in  the 
Department  of  State,  and  I  had  no  other  way  at  my  command  of  removing  them  than 
this  one  of  showing  them  up." 

ASKED    BURTON   TO    HELP. 

"You  say  that  mutual  friends  of  President  Roosevelt  and  yourself  assured  you  that 
the  former  would  surely  act  on  this  showing  of  yours.  Do  you  mind  telling  who  these 
friends  were?" 

"No,  I  do  not  object;  and  I  will  tell  if  you  press  the  question:  It  is  a  natural  one, 
because  so  many  have  asked  me  why  Mr.  Burton  has  not  insisted  on  this  being  done, 
which  I  now  urge  upon  the  Attorney  General.  Mr.  Burton  did  try  to  get  Secretary 
Root  to  make  a  date  on  which  to  meet  with  him  and  myself,  in  the  State  Department; 
this  attempt  was  made  by  Mr.  Burton  on  March  6,  1907.  Root  peremptorily  refused 
to  do  so.  Mr.  Burton  was  very  much  surprised,  and  when  he  reported  that  refusal  to 
me,  I  at  once  told  him  why  Root  did  not  meet  us  in  his  (Burton's)  presence.  Root 
knew  I  would  bring  these  matters  up." 

"What  is  the  particular  offense  of  those  men  whom  you  desire  the  Attorney  General 
to  proceed  against  and  punish?" 

"Those  men  are  the  men  who,  in  1890-91,  seduced  Mr.  Blaine  from  the  path  of  his 
plain  duty  in  the  premises;  and  that  lapse  on  his  part  cost  us  that  fiasco  at  Paris  which 
resulted  in  the  award  of  the  Bering  Sea  tribunal;  that  award  put  the  fur  seal  herd  of 
Alaska  into  the  hands  of  the  land  and  sea  butchers  of  it  completely;  just  what  it  was 
not  supposed  to  do,  by  the  people,  and  not  intended  to  be;  that  result  has  cost  us  the 
loss  of  over  5,000,000  of  fur  seals— a  property  loss  of  over  $30,000,000  up  to  date,  and 
still  this  question  is  unsettled.  Now  yet,  and  worse,  it  has  inflicted  the  most  indecent 
and  cruel  killing  of  those  seals  that  has  ever  been  licensed  by  a  civilized  government; 
all  this  sin  and  shame  fairly  fastened  on  us  by  those  men.  Do  you  wonder  why  I  want 
them  punished?" 

WHY  HE  DIDN'T  GO. 

"Couldn't  Senator  Burton  have  gone  to  see  President  Roosevelt?" 

"Yes,  and,  no;  necessarily  there  is  a  distinct  line  drawn  between  the  legislative  and 
executive  officers  of  our  Government;  a  Senator  or  a  Congressman  has  no  right  to  go 
down  to  the  office  of  a  Cabinet  member  and  personally  order  business;  and  no  Cabinet 
officer  has  the  right  to  go  up  to  a  committee  in  Congress  and  personally  lobby  or  pro- 
mote his  business  there.  True,  some  Senators  and  certain  Congressmen  and  certain 
Cabinet  officers  do  violate  this  proper  rule;  but  Mr.  Burton  would  not.  Mr.  Burton 
understands  that  I  am  right  in  this  Alaskan  fur  seal  business;  he  has  frankly  admitted  it, 
and  he  has  explained  to  my  complete  satisfaction  why  he  thought  it  would  be  useless  on  his 
part  to  try  and  get  Roosevelt  to  act.  Mr.  Cassidy  and  Mr.  Rowland  both  so  understand 
it  now,  as  they  would  have  understood  it  then,"  replied  Mr.  Elliott. 

"Then  you  believe  that  these  men  can  be  punished  on  that  evidence  which  you 
ask  the  Attorney  General  to  order  out  of  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee?  " 

"There  is  not  a  shadow  of  doubt  of  it.  Why  has  it  been  suppressed  if  that  fact  of  its 
power  to  convict  those  men  was  not  well  known  to  certain  men  close  to  President 
Roosevelt?  "  said  the  professor.  (Evening  News,  Cleveland,  Ohio,  June  26, 1909.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  73 

RECAPITULATION  OF  THE  PROOF  OF  GUILTY  KNOWLEDGE  OF  CHARLES 
NAG  EL  IN  RE  KILLING  YEARLING  SEALS  IN  VIOLATION  OF  LAW 
AND  THE  REGULATIONS. 

[See  Exhibit  III  for  details.] 

April  26,  1909. — Henry  W.  Elliott  gives  Secretary  Charles  Nagel 
specific  details  of  the  killing  of  yearling  seals  by  the  agents  of  the 
Government  on  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska.  He  urges  Nagel  to  stop 
it  and  punish  the  lessees  for  this  criminal  trespass.  (See  pp.  74,  75, 
Dixon  Hearings,  Rothermel  letter,  May  20,  1911.) 

May  7,  1909. — Secretary  Nagel  appoints  George  A.  Clark  as  a 
special  investigator  and  sends  him  to  the  seal  islands  to  report  upon 
the  truth  of  Elliott's  charges  in  re  killing  yearling  seals.  (See  pp. 
819-820,  Appendix  A,  June  24,  1911.) 

September  30,  1909. — George  A.  Clark  reports  that  Lembkey  has 
killed  yearling  seals  dining  this  season  of  1909  and  in  past  seasons. 
October  8,  Xagel  receives  this  report,  and  on  October  9  he  turns  it  over 
to  Lembkey.  It  is  suppressed.  (See  pp.  850,  851,  Appendix  A, 
June  24,  1911.) 

May  9,  1910.— With  this  proof  of  the  truth  of  Elliott's  charges  of 
April  26,  1909,  in  his  hands,  furnished  by  his  own  agent,  Clark,  Nagel 
to-day  again  sends  Lembkey  to  the  islands  to  kill  seals  just  as  he  had 
done  In  1909.  Lembkey  kills  12,920  seals  in  June  and  July,  1910. 
On  April  13,  1912,  he  confesses  to  House  Committee  on  Expenditures 
in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor  that  7,733  of  them  were 
yearlings.  (See  pp.  485,  Hearing  No.  10.) 

February  4,  1911-May  31,  1 911. —Secretary  Charles  Nagel  attends 
sessions  of  the  United  States  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation  of 
Natural  Resources  and  of  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in 
the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  and  his  agents  admit  that 
Lembkey  has  again  been  sent  with  orders  to  kill  in  1911  just  as  he 
had  killed  in  1910.  And  they  enter  a  studied  and  emphatic  denial  on 
February  4,  1911,  and  June  9,  1911,  that  they  have  ever  killed  any 
yearling  seals.  (See  pp.  82,  Hearing  No.  20,  p.  360,  Hearing  No.  9, 
pp.  434-444,  Hearing  No.  9.) 

December  15,  1911. — The  London  sales  records  show  that  12,002 
Pribilof  Island  fur  sealskins  were  sold  to-day,  taken  last  June  and 
July  (1911),  by  Nagel,  Bowers,  and  Lembkey;  that  6,247  of  these 
skins  were  less  than  34  inches  long  and  were  thus  yearling  skins. 
(See  pp.  731-733,  Hearing  No.  12.) 

The  guilty  knowledge  of  George  M.  Bowers,  who  stated  June  9, 
1911,  under  oath,  that  the  fur  sealskins  are  classified  and  sold  by 
weights  in  London,  said  statement  being  a  falsehood  and  made  to 
deceive  the  committee,  and  so  confessed  by  his  confederate,  Chief 
Special  Agent  Lembkey  April  13,  1912,  under  oath,  to  the  commit- 
tee, to  wit: 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  add  one  word?  In  Mr.  Elliott's  statement  it 
appear?  that  "In  1873,  early  in  Juiie,  Dr.  Mclntyre  returned  to  the  seal  islands  with 
this  classification,  by  measurement,  of  his  Pribilof  skins  in  London."  Those  meas- 
urements are  shown  in  the  monograph — measurements  and  weights— prepared  in 
thi iso  days  by  Mr.  Elliott,  and  in  that  monograph  a  yearling  skin,  a  large  yearling, 
if  I  quote  the  language  correctly,  is  presumed  to  weigh  \\  pounds,  and  he  shows  the 
weight  earn  year  of  the  skins  from  that  up  to  1\  and  8,  or'more.  I  do  not  know  how 
to  tell  the  age  of  a  sealskin — that  is,  the  exact  and  correct  age  to  the  day  or  month — 
any  more  than  a  farmer  could  tell  the  age  of  some  other  fellow's  pig  if  he  were  not 


74  FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

present  at  the  time  the  pig  came  into  existence,  and  I  can  only  base  the  correctness 
of  these  weights  upon  the  evidence  that  was  submitted  by  Mr.  Elliott  and  his  mono- 
graph. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  Mr.  Commissioner,  will  you  proceed  and  read  the  weights  of  the 
kill  of  1910,  as  certified  by  Mr.  Lembkey? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  have  both  the  weights  on  the  islands  and  the  weights  in  London. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  T  will  examine  you  now  as  to  the  killing  of  seals  after  the  expi- 
ration of  this  lease  and  when  the  killing  was  made,  as  it  has  been  called  here  by  the 
Government.  The  report  shows  that  in  the  year  1910,  12,920  seals  were  killed,  and 
the  evidence  before  the  committee  is  that  of  those  8.000  were  yearlings. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Well,  that  evidence  is  false. 

Mr.  TOWNJSEND.  That  is  your  answer  to  that,  is  it? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Yes,  sir.  Here  are  the  weights  on  the  basis,  you  understand,  that 
a  4^-pound  skin  is  a  yearling.  There  are  the  weights  for  1909,  the  island  weights  and 
the  London  weights.  I  think,  probably,  you  will  find  one  skin  weighing  less  than 
4i  pounds.  (Hearing  No.  3,  pp.  129,  130.) 

C.  M.  LAMPSON  &  Co., 

London,  November  19,  1910. 

Assortment  of  Alaska  salted  fur  sealskins  for  account  of  United  States  Government, 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor. 

[New  York,  Ck,  1/228.] 

Lbs.    Ozs. 

78  smalls 7  15 

713  large  pups 7  12 

3,032  middling  pups 6  7 

4,899  small  pups 5  12 

1,266  ex.  small  pups 5 

11  ex.  ex.  small  pups 4  10 

33  smalls,  low 7  11 

135  large  pups,  low 6  9 

498  middling  pups,  low 6  1 

501  small  pups,  low 5  9 

88  ex.  small  pups,  low 5  0 

10  small,  cut 7  2 

71  large  pups,  cut 6  13 

238  middling  pups,  cut 6 

421  small  pups,  cut 5  6 

81  ex.  small  pups,  cut 4  15 

6  small,  rubbed 7  0 

55  large  pups,  rubbed 6  14 

195  middling  pups,  rubbed 6  6 

290  small  pups,  rubbed 5  11 

75  ex.  small  pups,  rubbed 5  3 

36  faulty. 


12,732  average  based  on  December,  1909,  prices  144/. 

5  small. 
21  large  pups. 
48  middling  pups. 
94  small  pups. 
18  ex.  small  pups. 

2  faulty. 


188  average  based  on  December,  1909,  prices  120/. 

12,920 

Subject  to  recount. 

Mr.  PATTON.  You  mean  it  is  a  report  that  is  sworn  to  by  the  people  who  do  the 
selling  in  London? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  No,  sir;  it  is  the  classification  of  the  London  merchants  who  sell  the 
skins  for  the  United  States  Government. 

Mr.  PATTON.  And  they  pay  on  that  weight? 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  75 

Mr.  BOWERS.  They  sell  on  those  weights.  Their  classification  is  made  on  those 
weights. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Right  there  I  want  to  interpose  the  statement  that  they  do  not  weigh 
those  skins  to  classify  them.  They  measure  them.  (Hearing  No.  6,  p.  291.) 

In  this  distinct  and  positive  statement  the  United  States  Commis- 
sioner of  Fisheries  tells  the  committee  that  the  London  classification 
of  its  12,920  fur-seal  skins,  which  have  been  taken  on  the  seal  islands 
during  its  season  of  1910  and  sold  in  London  December  16,  1910 — that 
this  classification  is  done  there  by  the  weights  of  the  skins. 

He  does  this  in  full  personal  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  those  Lon- 
don agents  have  classified  those  skins  by  measurement,  so  as  to  get  at 
their  size;  that  the  buyers  care  nothing  for  the  weight  of  the  salt  cured 
skins — they  are  buying  the  skins  according  to  their  size. 

That  he  made  this  statement  to  the  committee  for  the  purpose  of 
deceiving  them,  and  that  he  knew  better,  for  he  had  personally  at- 
tended the  classification  and  selling  of  those  skins  in  London  Decem- 
ber 16,  1910,  is  attested  by  his  own  official  record,  as  follows: 

[Appendix  A,  p.  1009.] 

LONDON,  December  16,  1910, 
Hon.  CHARLES  XAGEL, 

Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  Washington,  D.  C. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  SECRETARY:  I  have  just  wired  you  the  total  results  of  the  fur-seal- 
skin  sale  which  has  just  taken  place: 

"Conditions  considered,  have  had  a  remarkably  successful  sale.  Total  amount, 
89,424  pounds." 

When  we  take  into  consideration  the  average  grading  of  the  skins  as  compared 
with  last  year,  there  is  a  loss  of  only  about  3  per  cent. 

I  am  inclosing  you  a  copy  of  the  advertisements  for  the  year  1909  as  well  as  for 
1910.  I  think  it  is  well  to  have  these  for  office  reference.  I  had  hoped  for  a  larger 
amount,  but,  after  conference  with  the  fur  dealers  of  London,  was  prepared  to  receive 
10  per  cent  or  even  15  per  cent  less  than  last  year's  prices,  and  I  think,  as  I  have 
said  above,  that  we  had  a  very  successful  sale. 

I  leave  the  latter  part  of  the  week  for  Germany  and  will  go  direct  to  Bad  Nauheim, 
I  regret  to  say  that  my  condition  has  not  improved. 

Wishing  you  and  yours  a  merry  Christmas  and  a  happy  and  prosperous  New  Year, 
I  am.  with 'renewed  assurances  of  my  highest  personal  esteem  and  regard, 
Very  truly,  yours, 

GEO.  M.  BOWERS. 

Here  ho  tells  the  Secretary  that  he  has  been  busy  with  the  buyers 
and  that  he  had  also  been  busy  with  the  Lampsons,  who  did  the  clas- 
sifying and  selling  of  those  small  skins  to  the  buyers  aforesaid,  as  his 
own  agents. 

That  a  man  of  common  sense  and  average  ability  should  personally 
attend  this  sale  as  the  representative  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce 
and  Labor  and  then  make  that  dogmatic  statement  of  untruth  in 
good  faith  as  to  the  classification  of  the  skins,  as  above,  is  simply 
unbelievable:  he  knew  better;  he  never  had  a  buyer  tell  him  or  nis 
own  agent  tell  him  that  untruth  which  he  tells  to  the  committee 
under  oath. 

In  further  proof  of  the  personal  understanding  which  Mr.  Commit 
sioner  Bowers  had  of  what  ordered  the  conduct  of  the  sale  of  those 
skins,  the  additional  letters  are  submitted.  It  is  fairly  incredible  to 
believe  that  a  subject  which  affected  the  prices  of  his  skins — the 
"grading"  of  them  as  he  calls  it,  or  the  classification  of  them — was 


76  FUK-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

not  fully  explained  to  him  by  his  agent,  the  Lampsons,  and  those 
buyers,  whom  he  speaks  of,  to  wit : 

[Appendix  A,  pp.  1009-1010.] 

LONDON,  December  16,  1910. 
Hon.  CHARLES  NAGEL, 

Secretary  of  Commerce  qnd  Labor, 

Washington,  D.  C.,  U.S.  A. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  SECRETARY:  Herewith  inclosed  you  will  find  catalogues  showing  the 
prices  received  at  the  auction  this  day  for  the  fur  seals  of  Alaska  and  elsewhere,  and 
When  we  take  into  consideration  the  number  of  skins  offeree!  for  sale  and  the  climatic 
as  well  as  financial  conditions,  I  think  we  have  had.  as  far  as  our  skins  are  concerned, 
an  exceptionally  good  sale. 

Lot  No.  1  sold  at  a  decline  of  20  shillings  as  compared  with  last  year— this  gave  me 
the  blues.  The  second  lot,  400  large  pups,  sold  at  a  decline  of  9  shillings;  this  of 
course  was  better,  but  when  6.200  small  pups  and  extra  small  pups  sold  at  a  loss  of 
1  shilling  as  compared  with  last  year,  this  very  much  improved  the  situation.  Un- 
fortunately our  skins  did  not  grade  so  well  as  heretofore.  You  will  observe  that  the 
664  skins  of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.  did  not  bring  prices  nearly  so  good 
as  those  gotten  by  the  Government.  You  will  further  observe  that  the  skins  of  the 
northwest  coast  sold  at  an  average  of  at  least  7£  per  cent  less  as  compared  with  the 
prices  received  by  us.  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  skins  of  the  northwest  coast 
this  year  graded  a  little  better  than  usual. 

Under  the  terms  of  the  sale  a  remittance  by  C.  M.  Lampson  &  Co.  will  be  made  on 
December  30.  I  shall  leave  London  on  the  19th,  and  my  address  for  the  next  three 
weeks  will  be  Hotel  Kaiserhof,  Bad  Nauheim,  Germany. 

With  assurances  of  personal  esteem  and  regard,  believe  me, 
Sincerely, 

GEO.  M.  BOWERS. 

LONDON,  December  19,  1910. 
Hon.  CHARLES  NAGEL, 

Secretary  Commerce  and  Labor,  Washington,  D.  C.,  U.  S.  A.  > 

DEAR  MR.  SECRETARY:  Herewith  inclosed  you  will  find  several  statements  fc 
record  in  the  department,  one  showing  the  number  of  skins  sold,  the  prices  realized 
for  each  lot,  and  the  average  weight  of  the  skins;  then  another  statement  showing  by 
whom  purchased.  I  also  inclose  a  report  showing  the  prices  received  for  all  other 
skins  sold,  with  last  year's  prices,  for  the  purpose  of  comparison;  also  a  statement 
issued  by  C.  M.  Lampson  &  Co.,  as  well  as  two  other  statements,  one  by  Phillips, 
Pollitzer  &  Co.,  and  the  other  by  Blatspiel,  Staup  &  Haycock,  the  principal  London 
buyers  of  the  Alaskans.  These  reports  will  show  the  situation  so  far  as  London  and 
the  Continent  are  concerned.  It  pleases  me  to  state  that  the  gross  proceeds  from  the 
sale  for  the  12,920  skins  is  £89,624  16s.,  an  advance  of  £200  more  than  the  amount  given 
in  my  cablegram.  The  amounts  received,  as  shown  in  this  report,  differ  some  little 
from  the  statement  I  sent  you  some  days  ago,  but  on  the  whole  our  Government  gains 
an  additional  £200. 

Your  cablegram  of  congratulations  was  greatly  appreciated,  and  I  feel  much  relieved 
after  a  hard  year's  arduous  labor.  I  leave  for  Berlin  to-night,  and  will  proceed  from 
there  to  Bad  Neuheim  immediately  after  Christmas  and  make  a  strenuous  endeavor  to 
recuperate,  or,  in  other  words,  to  recover  my  health. 

With  the  compliments  of  the  season,  believe  me, 

Sincerely,  GEO.  M.  BOWERS. 

P.  S. — In  a  personal  letter  to  Mr.  Cable  I  stated  I  would  send  him  a  list  of  pur- 
chasers. This  is  found  in  a  catalogue  which  I  have  marked  "Document  4."  My 
address  will  be  Hotel  Kaiserhof,  Bad  Neuheim. 

That  Mr.  Commissioner  Bowers  knew  better,  that  he  had  full 
knowledge  of  the  fact  that  those  skins  had  been  classified  by  measure- 
ment in  London,  is  given  below  by  the  sworn  admission  of  his  own 
agent,  W.  I.  Lembkey. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Let  me  before  you  pass  from  that  ask  this:  You  weigh  these  green 
skins  on  the  islands,  and  then  measure  them  in  the  markets  in  London.  What  is 
your  purpose  in  weighing,  and  what  is  their  purpose  in  measuring? 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA.  77 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Our  purpose  in  weighing  the  skins  on  the  island  is  to  get  them  within 
the  weights  prescribed  by  the  regulations.  Our  regulations  prescribe  maximum  and 
minimum  weights.  These  weights  are  5  pounds — 

Mr.  YOUNC.  Does  that  relate  to  the  question  of  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Five  pounds  and  eight  and  one-half  pounds. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Passing  from  the  weight,  in  London  what  is  the  determining  purpose 
in  measuring? 

Mr.  LEMBKEV.  They  measure  them,  I  fancy 

Mr.  YOUXG.  Are  they  trying  to  arrive  at  the  question  of  age,  too? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  are  trying  to  get  the  size  of  the  skin  or  the  amount  of  fur  on 
the  animal. 

Mr.  YOUXG.  They  care  nothing  about  the  question  of  age  there? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Nothing  at -all. 

Mr.  YOUXG.  That  is  all  I  care  to  ask.     (Hearing  No.  9,  pp.  448,  449.) 

******* 

Mr.  I iowEus.  Mr.  Lembkey  is  not  a  member  of  the  advisory  board,  but  is  a  member 
of  the  fur-seal  board. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  We  want  that  distinctly  understood.  We  want  to  find  out  where  he 
comes  in,  and  where  to  put  the  responsibility.  Is  not  Mr.  Lembkey  responsible  for 
anything?  Did  he  not  get  his  orders  from  you? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  He  did,  under  those  instructions. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Does  he  not  get  his  orders  from  that  advisory  board,  through  you? 
(Hearing  Xo.  2,  pp.  116-117.) 

Mr.  BOWERS.  He  gets  his  orders  from  me  as  approved  by  the  Secretary. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  he  is  bound  by  them? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  He  is. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  want  Mr.  Bowers  to  explain  right  here  why 
Mr.  Lembkey,  introduced  by  Secretary  Nagel,  said  on  February  4  last,  at  a  hearing  of 
the  conservation  committee  of  the  United  States,  on  page  10,  in  answer  to  this  question; 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  How  many  did  you  kill  last  year? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  We  killed  12,920.* 

"Q.  What  was  the  youngest  seal  you  killed;  what  age?" 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Where  is  that? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  hope  you  will  get  that.  I  want  Mr.  Bowers  to  get  these  questions, 
Nothing  would  please  me  less  than  to  appear  as  a  prosecuter  here,  because  I  am  not, 
I  want  to  get  at  the  facts.  On  page  10  the  chairman  of  this  Senate  committee  asked 
certain  questions  of  Mr.  Lembkey.  Mr.  Lembkey  is  introduced  to  that  committee  by 
Secretary  Xagel  as  the  responsible  agent  of  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor 
to  speak  for  him;  and  for  you,  of  course. 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  How  many  did  you  kill  last  year? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  We  killed  12,920. 

"Q.  What  was  the  youngest  seal  you  killed;  what  age? 

"A.  Two  years  old?' 

There  we  have  the  official  statement  of  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
without  doubt  or  equivocation,  without  any  question  of  law  or  anything,  given  to  the 
Senate  committee,  that  they  had  killed  none  of  those  seals,  12,920,  under  2  years  of  age, 
Are  you  ready  to  certify  to  that  statement  here  before  this  committee? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  That  is  Mr.  Lemb key's  statement. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Xo;  but,  my  dear  sir,  he  is  your  agent.     I  want  you  to  certify  to  it, 

Mr.  CABLE.  Do  you  want  him  to  certify  to  "it,  or  are  you  asking  whether  he  does? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Excuse  me  if  I  am  arguing,  but  I  want  to  get  at  the  responsibility  for 
this  statement.  If  Mr.  Lembkey  is  irresponsible,  why  was  he  brought  up  there?  It 
he  is  responsible,  why  are  you  evading  the  responsibility? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  am  not  evading  anything;  I  want  that  distinctly  understood. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  you  certify  to  that  statement? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  do  not  have  to  certify  to  any  statement  made  by  another  man, 
That  is  his  statement.  That  is  the  statement  as  it  comes  to  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries 
from  the  officials.  That  is  an  official  record  as  it  comes  to  me. 

We  now  come  into  the  immediate  relation  of  the  United  States 
Bureau  of  Fisheries  to  this  fur-seal  business  of  the  Government, 
When  Dr.  Jordan  and  his  associated  scientists,  Stejneger,  Lucas,  and 
Townsend  finished  their  work  of  completely  approving  the  most 
rigorous  and  injurious  driving  and  close  killing  of  the  seals  by  the 
lessees,  they  then  published,  in  1898,  this  approval  in  their  final  report 
on  fur-seal  investigations;  the  lessees  then  determined  to  have  a 


78  FUK-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 

continuation  of  such  "scientific"    indorsement.  Prior  to  this  the 

naturalists,  generally,  had  secured  the  insertion  of  a  clause  in  an 

appropriation  bill  as  early  as  March  3,  1893  (27  Stat.,  583),  which 
reads  as  follows: 

The  Commissioner  of  Fish  and  Fisheries  is  authorized  and  required  to  investigate 
Under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  and  when  so  requested  report 
annually  to  him  regarding  the  conditions  of  seal  life  upon  the  rookeries  of  the  Pribilof 
Islands;  and  he  is  also  directed  to  continue  the  inquiries  relative  to  the  life  Iv story 
and  migrations  of  the  fur  seals  frequenting  the  waters  of  Bering  Sea. 

This  caused  the  sending  of  several  naturalists  to  the  islands  in 
1894  and  1895  on  that  errand.  The  lessees  had  not  found  any  of 
them  at  all  troublesome,  and  when  Dr.  Jordan  closed  his  initial  service 
to  them  in  1897  as  a  scientist,  they  resolved  to  have  no  succeeding 
naturalist  get  up  there  who  might  not  be  as  tractable. 

So,  the  astute  and  active  lessee,  United  States  Senator  Elkins,  in 
the  full  determination  to  have  a  man  at  the  head  of  this  Bureau  of 
Fisheries  on  whom  he  could  rely,  secured  the  appointment  and  the 
confirmation  of  one  George  M.  Bowers,  as  United  States  Commissioner 
of  Fisheries,  in  February,  1898. 

Here  was  a  man  notoriously  ignorant  of  every  detail  of  this  office, 
and  yet  selected  and  confirmed  in  spite  of  the  law  which  declares 
that  he  "must  be  learned  as  a  fish  culturist,"  and  "an  educated 
scientist" — just  because  lessee  Elkins  wanted  it  done  for  this  per- 
sonal reason.  And  that  man  Bowers  came  before  the  House  com- 
mittee with  a  pitiful  attempt  to  tell  them  that  Elkins  did  not  order 
his  appointment  and  confirmation,  to  wit: 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  never  asked  a  single  man  in  the  United  States  to  indorse  me  for  the 
Commissionership  of  Fisheries. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  If  you  will  impart  information  to  this  committee  as  to  how  to  secure 
such  good  positions  without  indorsements,  it  will  be  interesting. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  had  the  indorsements  for  the  collectorship  of  Senator  Elkins  and 
then 

Mr.  TOWNSEND  (interposing).  That  is  all  right.  Now,  we  will  go  on  from  that  point. 
Senator  Elkins,  at  the  time  he  indorsed  you  for  that  office,  and  when  he  found 

Mr.  BOWERS  (interposing).  Not  for  that  office;  he  did  not  indorse  me  for  the  col- 
lectorship at  all. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  Did  he  indorse  you  for  this  position  of  Commissioner  .of  Fisheries? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  presume  he  did,  as  did  the  entire  West  Virginia  delegation,  as  well 
as  ex-Senator  Faulkner,  at  that  time  a  member  of  the  Senate. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  no  doubt  they  were  perfectly  justified  in  doing  so,  because 
you  have  the  reputation  of  being  a  very  skillful  and  useful  man,  and  there  is  no  re- 
flection implied  in  this  question.     I  am  simply  trying  to  get  before  the  committee 
Whom  your  political  backers  were. 
,     Mr.  BOWERS.  Well,  Senator  Elkins  and  I  were  warm  friends. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  And  he  was  at  that  time  a  stockholder,  was  he  not,  in  the  company 
that  had  the  contract  for  the  seal  killing? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  was  not  aware  of  that,  sir,  and  I  am  not  to-day.  And  I  never  heard 
that  Senator  Elkins  held  an  interest  in  the  seal  contract  until  I  was  told  so  on  the 
islands  in  1906. 

Mr.  McDERMOTT.  What  did  they  say  to  you  at  that  time? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  was  told  by  one  of  the  employees  of  the  North  American  Commercial 
Co.,  when  I  was  there  with  Mr.  Sims,  that  "your  Senator  from  West  Virginia  is  a  stock- 
holder in  this  company." 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  That  was  before  the  transfer  was  made  to  your  department  that 
you  became  -aware  of  that? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Well,  I  was  told  that  at  that  time. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  Now,  that  is  satisfactory.  You  took  charge  of  the  affairs  of  this 
contract  something  like  15  or  16  months  before  the  expiration  of  the  contract,  did  vou 
not? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Yes;  something  like  that.  (Hearing  No.  2,  pp.  70,  71,  June  9,  1911. 
H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  &  Labor.) 


FUR-SEAL  HEED  OF  ALASKA.  79 

By  getting  their  own  man  into  this  office,  armed  with  that  "duty" 
and  authority  of  making  " scientific"  studies  of  that  herd,  and  of  the 
lessees'  work  annually,  it  became  easy  for  Mr.  Senator  Elkins  and 
Mr.  D.  O.  Mills  to  control  that  arm  of  inquiry,  and  report.  Then, 
with  that  ''•  scientific"  control  on  the  one  hand,  with  the  control  of 
the  civil  agents  on  the  other,  the  lessees  had  nothing  to  concern  them- 
selves about  over  reports  that  might  be  annually  filed  in  the  Treasury 
Department,  or  in  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries. 

The  results  that  followed  amply  paid  them  for  their  trouble  in 
getting  this  unfit  man  Bowers  installed.  They  kept  him  there,  too, 
in  spite  of  protests  and  proof  of  his  unfitness  piled  mountain  high. 

Tne  lessees  also  had  another  object  in  sight,  and  Bowers  was  the 
man  to  reach  it  for  them.  They  knew  that  they  would  have  great 
opposition  to  a  renewal  of  their  lease  in  1910,  so  they  banked  upon 
Bowers  in  this  office  as  being  able  to  secure  that  renewal  for  them. 

In  order  that  Bowers  should  not  be  hampered,  they  persuaded 
Theodore  Roosevelt  and  Oscar  Straus  to  put  all  of  the  details  of  this 
fur  seal  business  into  Bowers's  control  by  an  Executive  order  dated 
December  28,  1908,  as  follows,  to  wit: 

DECEMBER  28,  1908. 

To  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries,  the  agents  charged  icith  the  management  of  the  seal 
fisheries  in  Alaska,  and  others  concerned: 

By  virtue  of  the  authority  vested  in  me  by  the  Revised  Statutes  of  the  United 
States,  sections  1973  and  161,  and  by  the  organic  act  creating  this  department,  ap- 
proved February  14,  1903,  it  is  hereby  ordered  that,  subject  to  the  direction  of  the 
head  of  the  department,  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries  shall  be  charged  with  the 
general  management,  supervision  and  control  of  the  execution,  enforcement,  and 
administration  of  the  laws  relating  to  the  fur-seal  fisheries  of  Alaska;  that  the  agents 
charged  with  the  management  of  the  seal  fisheries  of  Alaska,  together  with  such  other 
persons  in  the  employ  of  the  department  as  may  hereafter  be  engaged  in  the  execution 
of  the  said  laws,  shall  be  subject  to  the  immediate  jurisdiction  and  control  of  the  Com- 
missioner of  Fisheries,  and  shall,  in  addition  to  the  duties  required  of  them  by  law, 
perform  such  other  duties  as  he  may,  with  the  approval  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce 
and  Labor,  prescribe;  that  the  appropriations  for  "Salaries,  agents  at  seal  fisheries  in 
Alaska,"  1908  and  1909,  "Salaries  and  traveling  expenses  of  agents  at  seal  fisheries 
in  Alaska,"  1908  and  1909,  and  "Supplies  for  native  inhabitants,  Alaska,"  1908  and 
1909,  shall  be  expended  under  the  immediate  direction  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisher- 
ies, subject  to  the  supervision  of  the  Secretary;  and  that  all  records,  papers,  files, 
printed  documents  and  other  property  in  the  department  appertaining  to  the  fur-seal 
fisheries  of  Alaska  shall  be  transferred  from  their  present  custody  to  the  custody  of  the 
Bureau  of  Fisheries. 

OSCAR  S.  STRAUS,  Secretary. 

The  story  of  how  United  States  Commissioner  of  Fisheries,  George 
M.  Bowers,  used  every  arm  of  his  office  to  secure  a  renewal  of  this 
lease  for  his  patrons,  is  one  of  the  most  remarkable  exhibitions,  self- 
confessed,  of  arrogant,  official  malfeasance  that  has  ever  been  put 
into  sworn  testimony;  and  how  he  failed  is  equally  interesting.  It 
is  all  set  forth  in  Hearing  Xo.  3  (pp.  147-162,  July"  6,  1911,  H.  Com. 
Exp.  Dept.  Com.  &  Labor).  A  brief  excerpt  of  this  amazing  testi- 
mony is  given  below: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  I  want  Mr.  Bowers  to  pay  some  attention  to  this,  because  this 
is  important,  at  least  some  good  lawyers  have  told  me  that  it  is  very  important  to 
him — 

"Being  an  official  letter  covering  a  'memorandum'  addressed  to  George  M.  Bowers, 
commissioner,  urging  him  to  take  steps  to  prevent  the  passage  of  the  Dixon  fur-seal 
resolutions  introduced  in  the  United  States  Senate  by  Senator  Joseph  M.  Dixon. 
(S.  Res.  90,  91,  92.) 


80  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

"December  7,  1909.  This  letter  from  the  'bureau,'  dated  December  16,  1909,  and 
signed  by  Barton  W.  Everman,  urges  Bowers  to  send  agents  to  New  York,  there  to 
'educate'  the  Camp  Fire  Club  and  induce  them  to  agree  to  the  'bureau's  idea  of 
renewing  the  lease,'  as  follows: 

"EXHIBIT  No.  6. 

"DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

"BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 
"  Washington,  December  16,  1909. 
"THE  COMMISSIONER: 

"The  Washington  Star  of  December  10  last  announced  that  the  Camp  Fire  Club,  of 
New  York,  had  inaugurated  a  campaign  to  save  the  fur-seal  herd  through  legislation 
designed  to  prevent  the  re-leasing  of  the  sealing  right,  the  cessation  of  all  killing  on 
the  islands  for  10  years  except  for  natives'  food,  and  to  secure  the  opening  of  negotia- 
tions with  Great  Britain  to  revise  the  regulations  of  the  Paris  tribunal.  As  the  result 
of  this  movement,  on  December  7  three  resolutions  were  introduced  by  Senator  Dixon, 
of  Montana,  one  of  which  embodies  the  provisions  before  mentioned,  the  other  two 
calling  for  the  publication  of  fur-seal  correspondence  and  reports  since  1904. 

"As  the  object  of  this  movement  is  at  variance  with  the  program  of  this  bureau  and 
of  the  recommendations  of  the  advisory  fur-seal  board,  notably  in  the  plan  to  prevent 
killing  and  the  renewal  of  the  seal  island  lease,  the  advisability  is  suggested  of  having 
Messrs.  Townsend,  Lucas,  and  Stanley-Brown  use  their  influence  with  such  members 
of  the  Camp  Fire  Club  as  they  may  be  acquainted  with  with  the  object  of  correctly 
informing  the  club  as  to  the  exact  present  status  of  the  seal  question  and  of  securing 
its  cooperation  to  effect  the  adoption  of  the  measures  advocated  by  this  bureau  1 

"The  attached  letter  is  prepared,  having  in  view  the  object  stated. 

"BARTON  W.  EVERMANX. 

"Exhibit  No.  7.  Being  the  official  letter  of  'George  M.  Bowers,  commissioner,'  to 
Secretary  Commerce  and  Labor,  dated  February  8,  1910,  inclosing  copies  of  three 
letters,  all  urging  renewal  of  the  seal  lease  and  giving  the  reasons  of  the  writers  for 
such  renewal,  to  wit,  H.  H.  Taylor,  president  N.  A.  ('.  Co.  (lessees),  dated  January 
27,  1910;  C.  H.  Townsend,  for  'fur  seal  advisory  board,'  dated  January  31,  1910. 
Alfred  Fraser,  London  agent  for  the  N.  A.  C.  Co.  (lessees),  January  28,  1910,  as  follows: 

X.  When  Cleveland  replaced  Harrison,  March  4,  1893,  it  became 
necessary  to  put  a  Democrat  in  the  place  of  chief  special  agent  in 
charge  of  the  seal  islands,  Joseph  Stanley  Brown. 

So  Joseph  B.  Crowley  was  appointed  chief;  First  Assistant  Agent 
Murray,  Republican,  was  dropped  for  James  Judge,  a  Democrat;  but 
the  lessees  were  careful  of  then-  man,  Murray.  They  had  him  made 
a  salmon  fishing  inspector  for  Alaska,  without  a  moment's  loss  of 
time. 

Then  when  McKinley  came  in,  March  4,  1897,  it  was  in  turn  neces- 
sary to  drop  Crowley,  Democrat,  and  back  came  the  subservient 
Murray  to  the  office  of  chief  special  agent. 

Murray  died  in  Colorado  October,  1898,  and  was  succeeded  by 
John  M.  Morton,  who  was  as  subservient  in  turn  as  Murray  had  been. 
Morton  died  on  St.  Pauls  Island  July,  1900,  and  he  was  succeeded  by 
one  W.  J.  Lembkey,  as  chief,  who  has  been  equally  subservient  to  the 

1  COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 
DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Friday,  June  9,  1911. 
The  committee  met  at  10  o'clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman)  presiding. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MR.   GEORGE  M.   BOWERS,   COMMISSIONER  OF  FISHERIES. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  No  new  lease  was  made,  but  the  killing  was  done  under  governmental  supervision. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  You  will  be  questioned  about  that  later.  After  the  first  suggestion  of  this  bill  you  know 
of  no  efforts  that  were  made  to  delay  the  passage  of  that  legislation? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  know  of  no  effort  that  was  made  to  delay  the  passage  of  that  legislation. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  And  if  any  evidence  should  be  introduced  to  the  contrary,  it  would  surprise  you? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  So  far  as  I  am  concerned  it  would,  yes;  and  as  far  as  I  am  concerned  it  would  the  Bureau 
of  Fisheries  and  the  department.  (Investigation  of  fur-seal  industry  of  Alaska,  p.  73.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  81 

seal  con?  ami  has  been  sfeadily  in  office  as  such  ever  since,  up 

to  August  1.  1  «.)!:•>.     We  will  later  have  to  consider  Lembkey  again. 

But  this  selection  and  appointment  of  these  Government  agents  by 
the  lessee<  is  not  all  that  those  contractors  have  had  to  do  in  the 
premises:  it  was  not  enough:  so  they  have  had  that  particular  "back- 
room" officialism  in  the  Treasury  Department,  which  is  the  direct  and 
immediate  annex  to  the  Secretary's  office;  also  in  their  control  and 
hire,  because  it  was  necessary  that  the  reports  and  work  of  these  res- 
ident seal-island  agents  be  insured  of  a  friendly  interpretation  and 
official  reception  in  the  United  States  Treasury  Department,  so  that 
whenever  any  "impertinent  "  or  pertinent  questions  were  asked  of  the 
Secretary  as  to  the  conduct  of  the  lessees  or  the  public  business  on 
the  islands,  either  by  citizens  or  by  Congress,  no  "official"  blunder  as 
to  a  proper  answer  would  be  made;  it  has  been  managed  as  follows: 

A  standing  order  of  the  department  put  this  seal  island  business, 
reports,  etc.  all  in  the  care  of  the  "chief  special  agent  in  charge  of 
the  islands":  the  then  "assistant  agents"  were  all  ordered  to  report 
to  him:  he  then  used  his  discretion  as  to  how  much  or  how  little  of 
these  reports  he  was  to  use  or  forward  to  the  department :  then,  when 
this  report  of  the  chief  special  .agent  in  charge  of  the  seal  islands  was 
sent  to  the  Treasury  Department  it  was  received  and  filed  in  the 
"office  of  the  chief  special  supervising  agent";  to  this  man  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury  looked  for  all  the  official  information  and 
advice  he  had  at  his  command;  and  from  this  man  the  Secretary 
always  received  the  draft  of  that  part  of  his  annual  report  to  Congress 
which  related  to  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska. 

Therefore,  the  importance  to  the  lessees  of  having  such  a  man  in 
their  control  is  easy  to  understand ;  they  got  him.  When  Special  Agent 
Elliott  came  down  from  his  investigation  into  the  condition  of  affairs 
on  the  islands,  September  7,  1890,  he  found  that  a  man  named  A.  K. 
Tingle  was  this  "  chief  supervising  special  agent."  He  was  a  cousin 
of  George  R.  Tingle,  the  superintendent  of  the  lessees,  and  '' general 
manager"  on  the  islands.  Of  course  Elliott  found  him  " deeply 
interested,"  but,  in  favor  of  the  public  interests?  Not  at  all. 

Then  when  Cleveland  came  in,  a  '* Democrat"  was  put  in  Tingle's 
place,  and  he  (Tingle)  went  into  the  hire  of  the  Sugar  Trust.  When 
Cleveland  went  out,  of  course,  a  ''Republican"  had  to  come  back 
into  this  'l office"  of  "chief  supervising  special  agent,"  and  one  W.  S. 
Chance,  a  docile  tool  of  the  lessees,  took  that  place.  Elliott  calls  him 
a  "tool,"  with  all  of  the  proof  of  that  fact  in  his  hands. 

With  this  official  machinery  in  their  hands,  and  in  complete  control 
of  it,  the  lessees  have  actually  written  every  annual  report  of  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasuiy  to  Congress  on  the  condition  of  this  fur-seal 
herd,  and  their  own  conduct,  since  1890,  up  to  the  hour  that  this 
business  went  to  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  July  1, 
1903. 

XL  We  pass  now  from  the  "divided"  control  of  the  lessees  to  the 
single  control  of  the  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Fisheries.  Do  we  find  any 
improvement  *  Xo,  if  anything,  it  became  quite  as  bad;  fully  as 
much  so. 

The  moment  the  renewal  of  the  lease  was  defeated,  March,  1910, 
and  the  lessees  put  out  of  business,  these  scientists  of  the  Bureau  of 
Fish<»ri<  s  resolved  to  hav?  the  sealskin  business  continued  just  the 


32  FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 

same,  only  they  would  do  it  themselves.  The  work  of  slaughtering 
seals  in  1910  was,  therefore,  taken  up  and  pushed  as  hard,  and  close 
by  them  on  the  islands,  as  it  had  been  by  the  greedy  lessees  in  1909. 

Vigorous  protests  were  made  Secretary  Nagel  by  good  citizens,  but 
without  the  least  avail.  He  had  determined  to  continue  the  "  benevo- 
lent" killing  by  the  lessees,  so  as  to  appear  " regular"  in  his  indorse- 
ment of  that  injurious  work  when  backing  those  butchers  during  the 
lease.  He  stimulated  Dr.  Jordan  and  his  old  " scientific"  authorities 
who  had  shielded  that  illegal  work  of  the  lessees  since  1896  to  again 
come  forward  and  deny  this  improper  killing  and  vouch  for  its  con- 
tinuation in  1910  and  1911,  under  United  States  Commissioner 
Bowers's  and  Mr.  Lembkey's  direction,  as  being  done  wholly  right  in 
every  respect . 

The  proclamations  by  Jordan  and  his  subordinate  scientists,  were 
used  by  Secretary  Nagel  as  his  righteous,  sensible  warrant  for  killing 
""smalf"  seals;  t~nat  "it  was  necessary  for  the  good  of  the  herd,"  etc. 

This  stirred  up  an  investigation  into  that  killing,  by  order  of  Con- 
gress in  May,  1911,  and  the  following  salient  evidence  of  an  organ- 
ized attempt  to  deceive  the  Committee  on  ExpemHaiies  in  the  De- 
partment of  Commerce  and  Labor  by  the  scientists  associated  with 
the  bureau,  and  Dr.  Jordan's  commission,  known  as  the  "advisory 
board,"  was  quickly  exhibited. 

This  attempt  to  deceive  the  committee  was  made  with  reference 
to- 
First.  The  regulations  of  the  department  governing  the  taking  of 
seals  and  their  skins. 

Second.  The  classification  of  these  skins  when  taken. 

Third.  The  behavior  of  breeding  fur-seal  bulls. 

.  1.  With  regard  to  the  law  and  regulations  which  governed  the 
taking  of  fur  seals  on  the  islands,  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  prepared 
an  elaborate  statement,  and  presented  it  under  oath  to  the  com- 
mittee, and  in  that  statement  made  the  following  distinct,  and  spe- 
cific false,  and  improper  denial  of  the  "Carlisle  rules"  issued  May  14, 
1896,  and  quoted  above  under  Section  VI,  to  wit: 

COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 
DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Friday,  April  19,  1912. 

The  committee  met  at  10.30  o'clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman) 
presiding. 

Present:  Representatives  McDermott,  Young,  McGuire,  and  Patton. 

Testimony  of  Barton  W.  Evermann. 

The  witness  was  sworn  by  the  chairman. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Doctor,  you  may  state  your  official  position. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  My  official  position  is  assistant  in  charge  of  the  Alaska  fisheries 
service,  in  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Now,  if  you  desire,  you  may  proceed  to  submit  whatever  facts  you 
liave  for  the  consideration  of  the  committee. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  *    *    * 

2.  The  second  charge  is  that  at  least  128,478  yearling  male  seals  were  killed  by  the 
lessee  from  1890  to  1909,  both  inclusive,  contrary  to  law  and  the  regulations. 

In  answer  to  this  charge  it  should  be  sufficient  to  say  that  the  law  has  never  made 
it  illegal  to  kill  yearling  male  seals;  nor  has  it  ever  been  contrary  to  the  regulations 
to  kill  yearling  male  seals,  except  in  the  seasons  of  1904  and  1905,  as  is  shown  by  the 
regulations  for  the  various  years  to  which  I  have  called  your  attention.  Therefore, 
«ven  if  128,478  yearling  male  seals  have  been  killed  since  1899  (which  is  not  admitted) 
they  could  not  have  been  killed  illegally,  because  there  was  no  law  against  killing 
yearling  male  seals,  and  there  has  been  no  regulation  against  killing  yearling  male 
seals,  except  in  1904  to  1909. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF  ALASKA.  83 

The  fact  that  the  " Carlisle  rules"  prohibiting  the  killing  of  year- 
lings in  distinct  terms,  were  issued  May  14,  1896,  and  duly  pub- 
lished and  recorded  on  the  Seal  Islands  is  here  vainly  denied,  and 
concealed  from  the  committee  in  a  carefully  written  statement  pre- 
pared by  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  and  given  to  it  under  oath;  and, 
the  fact  that  those  orders  of  Secretary  Carlisle  have  never  been 
amended  or  revised  until  the  "  Hitchcock  rules'7  of  1904  were  ordered, 
is  also  concealed  from  the  committee  by  that  false  statement. 

2.  With  regard  to  the  classification  of  these  fur-seal  skins  when 
taken  on  the  islands,  and  then  shipped  to  London  for  sale,  there, 
the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  made  a  series  of  statements  when  first  before 
the  committee  which  were  found  later  to  be  entirely  false,  and  which 
said  Fisheries  Bureau  had  to  admit  were  such. 

When  the  question  was  first  directly  put  to  George  M.  Bowers, 
United  States  Commissioner  of  Fisheries,  as  to  how  these  skins  taken 
under  his  orders  on  the  Seal  Islands,  were  classified,  so  as  to  show 
their  sizes  and  ages  in  London,  he  said  (Hearing  No.  3,  p.  128,  June 
28,  1911,  Ho.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor): 

Mr.  TOWXSEXO.  I  will  examine  you  now  as  to  the  killing  of  seals  after  the  expira- 
tion of  this  lease  and  when  the  killing  was  made,  as  it  has  been  called  here  by  the 
Government.  The  report  shows  that  in  the  year  1910,  12,920  seals  were  killed,  and 
the  evidence  before  the  committee  is  that  of  those  8,000  were  yearlings. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Well,  that  evidence  is  false. 

Mr.  TOWXSEXD.  That  is  your  answer  to  that,  is  it? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Yes,  sir.  Here  are  the  weights  on  the  basis,  you  understand,  that  a 
42-pound  skin  is  a  yearling.  There  are  the  weights  for  1909 — the  island  weights  and 
the  London  weights.  I  think  probably  you  will  find  one  skin  weighing  less  than  4$ 
pounds. 

C.  M.  LAMPSON  &  Co.,  London,  19th  Nov.,  1910. 

•ment  of  Alaska  salted  fur  sealskin*  for  account  of   United  States  Government, 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor. 

[New  York,  Ck.  1/228.] 

Libs.    Ozs. 

78  smalls 7  15 

713  large  pups 7  2 

3,032  middling  pups 6  7 

4,899  small  pups 5  12 

1,266  ex.  small  pups 5  5 

11  ex.  ex.  small  pups 4  10 

33  smalls,  low 7  11 

135  large  pups,  low 6  9 

498  middling  pups,  low 6  1 

501  small  pups,  low 5  9 

88  ex.  small  pups,  low 5  0 

10  small,  cut 7 

71  large  pups,  cut 6  13 

238  middling  pups,  cut 6 

421  small  pups,  cut 5  6 

81  ex.  small  pups,  cut 4  15 

6  small,  rubbed 7  0 

55  large  pups,  rubbed 6  14 

195  middling  pups,  rubbed 6  6 

290  small  pups,  rubbed 5  11 

75  ex.  small  pups,  rubbed 5  3 

36  faulty. 

12,732  average  based  on  December,  1909,  prices  144/. 


84  FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 

.")  small. 
21  large  pups. 
48  middling  pups. 
94  small  pups. 
18  ex.  small  pups. 
2  faulty. 


188  average  based  on  December,  1909,  prices  120/. 

12,920 

Subject  to  recount. 

(Hearing  No.  6,  p.  291,  July  27,  1911,  Ho.  Com.  Kxp.  Dopt.  Com. 
and  Labor.) 

Mr.  PATTON.  You  mean  !:  is  a  report  thai  is  sworn  lo  by  tlie  people  who  do  the  sell- 
ing in  London? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  No.  sir;  it  is  the  classificJitioD  of  the  London  merchants  who  sell  the 
skins  for  the  United  States  Government. 

Mr.  PATTON.  And  they  pay  on  thot  weight? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  They  sell  on  those  weights.  Their  classification  is  made  on  those 
weights. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Right  there  I  want  to  interpose  the  slalemenl  that  ihey  do  not  weigh 
those  skins  to  classify  them.  They  measure  them.  (Hearing  No.  !l.  pp.  374-375.) 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  These  skins  which  were  sent  lo  London,  during  the  years  1909  and 
1910,  were  weighed  by  the  factors  after  their  arrival  in  London  and  the  weights  found 
to  correspond  with  those  taken  on  the  island.  As  this  factor.  Lampson  A:  Co.,  is  essen- 
tially a  disinterested  person,  being  concerned  not  the  least  with  the  question  of  weights 
or  regulations,  but  wholly  with  the  sale  of  the  skins  and  Hie  payments  therefor,  their 
verification  of  these  weights  may  be  taken  as  conclusive  of  their  accuracy. 

So  far,  therefore,  as  concerns  compliance  with  I  he  regulations  and  the  law  in  the  kill- 
ing of  male  seals,  no  malfeasance  can  be  proven,  because  not  only  the  records  of  the  de- 
partment but  the  weights  of  the  same  skins  in  London,  taken  by  an  independent  and 
responsible  body  of  experts,  prove  that  the  limits  of  weight  laid  down  by  the  instruc- 
tions of  the  department  have  been  complied  with  as  closely  as  it  is  possible  for  human 
agency  to  do  so.  The  weights  of  skins  taken  on  the  islands  show  this,  and  further- 
more these  weights  have  been  verified  in  London  by  an  independent  and  responsible 
body  of  men. 

Here  is  the  man  who  has  boon  placed  in  full  charge  of  this  public 
business,  the  commissioner  himself,  under  oath,  actually  swearing  to 
a  deliberate  falsehood  of  his  own  invention.  He  swears  that  these 
skins,  which  have  been  taken  under  his  orders,  arc  sold  in  London 
by  weight.  What  was  this  man's  object  in  so  testifying  >  ' 

To  conceal  the  fraud  of  taking  yearling  sealskins  on  the  islands 
which  weigh  only  4^  pounds  each,  clean  skinned,  as  the  work  was 
done  by  different  men  and  at  different  times,  this  weight  was  raised 
by  blubber  to  5,  5J,  6,  6J,  7,  and  8  pounds. 

The  committee  has  under  its  control  a  series  of  400  sealskins  taken 
in  1913  just  as  these  skins  were  taken  and  sold  in  1910.  Their 

1  That  Mr.  Bowers  had  full  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  he  was  deceiving  the  committee  is  given  by  his  own 
associate  and  subordinate,  most  unwillingly,  to  the  committee,  and  goes  completely  to  declare  the  proof 
of  Mr.  Bowers 's  possession  of  guilty  knowledge  and  use  of  it  to  deceive.  Chief  Special  Agent  Lembkey 
swears: 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Let  me  before  you  pass  from  that  ask  this:  You  weigh  these  green  skins  on  the  islands  and 
then  measure  them  in  the  markets  in  London.  What  is  your  purpose  in  weighing,  and  what  is  their  pur- 
pose in  measuring . 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Our  purpose  in  weighing  the  skins  on  the  island  is  to  get  them  within  the  weights  pre- 
scribed by  the  regulations.  Our  regulations  prescribe  maximum  and  minimum  weights.  Those  weights 
are  5  pounds — 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Does  that  relate  to  the  question  of  age . 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Five  pounds  and  eight  and  one-half  pounds. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Passing  from  the  weight,  in  London  what  is  the  determining  purpose  in  measuring. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  measure  them,  I  fancy- — 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Are  they  trying  to  arrive  at  the  question  of  age,  too . 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  are  trying  to  get  the  size  of  the  skin  or  the  amount  of  fur  on  the  animal. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  They  care  nothing  about  the  question  of  age  there. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Nothing  at  all. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  That  is  all  I  care  to  ask.  (Hearing  No.  9.  pp.  448,  449,  Apr.  13, 1912,  Ho.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
Com.  and  Labor.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  85 

exhibition  declares  every  detail  of  that  fraudulent  classification  by 
weight  which  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  and  the  lessees  managed  so  as 
to  falsify  the  returns  of  their  illegal  killing  on  the  islands  annually 
to  the  Government. 

The  scientists   of   the   Bureau   r.f  Fisheries,   who   have   aided  Mr. 
Bowers  in  this  false  statement  as  to  classification,  and  whom  he  cites 
to  the  committee  as  his  "authority"  for  making  it  in  the  followin 
words,  are  (Hearing  No.  2,  ]>.   Ill,  Ho.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  an 
Lab 

Mr.  BOWKKS.  I  had  in  mind  getting  the  best  talent  I  could;  I  expected  probable 
criticism. 

Mr.  TOWNSENI>.   1  am  not  criticizing  you  now. 

Mr.  BOWKKS.  I  endeavored  to  get  the  best  talent  it  was  possible  to  get  and  to  act 
upon  their  advice  in  this  fur-seal  matter. 

Mr.  (  AHI.K.  Give  the  names  of  the  members  of  the  advisory  board. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  The  members  of  the  fur-seal  board  and  of  the  advisory  board,  fur-seal 
service,  are  as  follows  (Hearing  No.  2,  pp.  109-110): 

" FUR-SEAL   BOARD,  BUREAU    OF   FISHERIES. 

"In  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  general  matters  regarding  the  fur  seals  are  considered 
by  a  fur-seal  board,  consisting  of  the  following: 

"Dr.  Barton  Warren  Evermann  (chairman),  who  is  chief  of  the  Alaska  Fisheries 
Service  and  who  has  been  in  Alaska  a  number  of  times.  He  was  a  member  of  the 
fur-seal  commission  of  1892,  when  he  spent  six  months  in  the  North  Pacific  and 
Bering  Sea  and  on  the  seal  islands  studying  the  fur  seal. 

•  Mr.  Walter  I.  Lembkey,  who  has  been  in  immediate  charge  of  the  seal  islands  for 
many  years:  appointed  March  22,  1899. 

•'Mr'.  James  Judge,  who,  as  assistant  agent,  fur-seal  service,  has  spent  many  years  on 
the  islands:  appointed  April  30,  1894. 

"Mr.  A.  B.  Alexander,  Chief  of  the  Division  of  Statistics  and  Methods  of  the  Fish- 
eries, who,  as  fishery  expert  on  the  steamer  Albatross,  visited  the  seal  islands  often, 
and  who  has  made  a  more  careful  study  of  pelagic  sealing  than  any  other  man. 

"Mr.  M.  C.  Marsh,  pathologist  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  who  spent  the  season  of 
1906  on  the  seal  islands  making  a  study  of  the  seal  herd. 

"The  advisory  board,  fur-seal  service,  consists  of  the  following: 

"Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan,  president  of  Stanford  University,  who  was  chairman  of 
the  International  Fur  Seal  Commissions  of  1896  and  1897,  appointed  in  pursuance 
of  the  treaty  of  February  29,  1892,  and  whose  published  report  in  four  volumes  is  the 
most  comprehensive,  thorough,  and  valuable  treatise  that  has  ever  been  published 
on  all  matters  pertaining  to  the  fur  seal  and  the  seal  islands.  Dr.  Jordan  is  the  most 
distinguished  and  best -known  naturalist  in  the  world. 

"Dr.  Leonhard  Stejnejrer,  head  curator  of  biology,  United  States  National  Museum, 
for  two  years  resident  on  the  Russian  seal  islands,  member  of  the  Fur  Seal  Commis- 
sions of  *1896  and  1897,  as  a  member  of  which  he  visited  and  studied  all  the  fur-seal 
rookeries  of  Alaska.  Russia,  and  Japan.  His  report  on  the  Russian  seal  islands  is  the 
most  critical  and  thoughtful  that  has  been  written. 

"Dr.  C.  Hart  Merriam,  until  recently  chief  of  the  Biological  Survey,  member  of  the 
Fur  Seal  Commission  of  1890,  and  the  greatest  living  authority  on  mammals. 

"Dr.  Frederic  A.  Lucas,  Director  of  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History, 
member  of  the  Fur  Seal  Commissions  of  1896  and  1897,  and  one  of  the  keenest,  most 
discerning,  and  best-known  naturalists. 

"Dr.  Charles  H.  Townsend,  director  of  the  New  York  Aquarium,  for  many  years 
naturalist  on  the  fisheries  steamer  Albatross,  member  of  the  Fur  Seal  Commissions  of 
1896  and  1897,  and  distinguished  as  a  naturalist  and  field  investigator.  Dr.  Townsend 
made  a  special  study  extending  over  many  years  of  our  fur  seals  and  pelagic  sealing. 

"Hon.  Edwin  W.  Sims,  United  States  attorney  for  the  northern  district  of  Illinois 
in  1906.  when  Solicitor  for  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor  spent  the  season 
on  the  seal  islands,  where  he  made  a  very  careful  study  of  the  conditions  on  the 
islands. 

"Hon.  Frank  II.  Hitchcock.  Postmaster  General,  who.  when  chief  clerk  of  the 
Department  of  Commerce  and  L-.ibnr.  had  charge  of  the  administration  of  the  seal 


86  FUK-SEAL  HEED   OF  ALASKA. 

"  In  addition  to  the  above  the  department  had  the  advice  of— 
"Dr.  F.  W.  True,  Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Smithsonian  Institution,  who  spent  the 
season  of  1895  on  the  seal  islands  as  a  special  commissioner  for  the  Government  to  study 
the  fur  seal.     Dr.  True  is  one  of  the  most  distinguished  mammalogists,  and  has  givon 
special  attention  to  marine  mammals.      «, 

"Mr.  George  A.  Clark,  secretary  of  Stanford  University,  who,  as  secretary  ot  the  Fur 
Seal  Commissions  of  1896  and  1897,  spent  many  months  on  the  seal  islands,  when  there 
was  made,  under  his  immediate  supervision,  the  most  careful  census  of  the  fur-seal 
herd  that  has  ever  been  made.  Mr.  Clark  was  again  on  the  seal  islands  during  the 
entire  season  of  1909,  where  he  was  sent  by  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor  as 
an  expert  to  study  the  seal  herd  during  the  last  year  of  the  North  American  Co.'s 
lease/' 

Here  is  an  imposing  list  of  names  who  are  thus  cited  by  Mr.  Com- 
missioner Bowers  as  being  his  "advisers"  and  as  the  men  who  have 
enabled  him  to  make  that  false  deelarali  n  of  classification  by  weights 
in  London  (by  his  "loaded"  given-skin  weights  on  the  islands). 
Yv7hat  did  these  men  do  when  summoned  and  put  under  rath  hy  the 
committee  and  questioned  as  to  this  charge  made  against  CYmmis- 
sioner  Bowers  of  killing  yearling  seals  in  violation  of  the  rules  of  the 
department — did  they  deny  the  charge?  Xo.  They  all  swcre  that 
they  did  not  know  anything  about  it:  that  they  did  not  km.w  h;:w 
to  describe  the  length  or  weight  of  a  yearling  sea'skin.  Witness  the 
following: 

I.  Dr.  Leonhard  Stejneger,  member  of  Advisory  Board  Fur-Seal  Service,  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor  (pp.  679-680,  Hearing  Xo.   11,  House  Committee  mi 
Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  May  4,  1912): 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Mr.  Elliott,  do  you  want  to  ask  him  any  questions'.' 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  only  a  few  questions  to  ask  him.  Dr.  Stejneger.  what  is  ihe 
length  of  a  yearling  fur  seal  of  the  Alaskan  herd  ? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  could  not  tell  you. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  ever  measured  one  of  the  Alaskan  herd? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  No." 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  do  not  know  anything  about  the  length  of  a  skin  of  a  yearling 
seal  as  taken  from  the  body? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Of  a  yearling  seal'.'  I  do  iiMt  know:  1  have  never  seen  a  yearling 
seal  killed  on  the  American  island?. 

•*  *  *  *  *  *  * 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Were  you  in  consultation  with  Mr.  Bowers  when  he  ordered  the  killing 
of  12,920  seals  on  the  seal  islands  in  1910? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Do  you  mean  in  personal  special  consultation  with  Mr.  Bowers? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Well,  as  a  member  of  the  board  do  you  remember  any  consultation 
with  him  about  issuing  those  orders? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  No;  I  do  not  remember. 

II.  Dr.  C.  Hartt  Merriam,  member  of  Advisory  Hoard  Fur-Seal  Service,  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor  (p.  692,  Hearing  No.  11): 

The  CHAIRMAN,  \\ell,  how  long  have  you  been  on  the  advisory  board? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  Since  the  beginning.  I  do  not  remember  the  date;  but  I  have  been 
absent  from  the  city  during  a  number  of  ihe  sittings  of  that  committee,  as  I  am 
engaged  in  field  wrork  in  the  West  at  least  half  of  every  year,  and  therefore  have  not 
been  in  Washington  at  the  time  most  of  these  meetings  were  held. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Were  you  at  the  meeting  of  the  advisory  board  that  the  previous 
witness  referred  to  in  his  testimony? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  do  not  remember  any  such  meeting. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Are  you  a  member  of  the  board  now? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  Yes. 

On  page  99,  Hearing  No.  11 : 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Doctor,  while  you  were  on  the  island  did  you  ascertain  the  length 
and  weight  of  a  yearling  seal? 

Dr.  MERRIAM/  I  did  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Do  you  know  anvthing  about  the  length  and  the  weight  of  a  yearlim 
sealskin? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  Nothing. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF  ALASKA.  8T 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  One  question  mon .  I  understood  you  to  say  that  you  had  not  been, 
in  consultation  with  Mr.  Bowers  when  he  issued  his  orders  for  killing:  13.000  seals  in 
1910? 

Dr.  MERUIAM.  I  do  not  think  1  was  present  at  any  conference  when  that  matter 
was  up. 

III.  Dr.  Barton  "NY.  Evcrmann.  member  of  Fur-Seal  Board,  Alaska  Seal  Fish- 
eries. Department  of  Commeirt-  and  Labor  (p.  622,  Hearing  No.  10): 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  know;  I  have  not  disputed  that,  but  I  want  to  find  what  you  did. 
on  the  island.  You  didn't  do  anything,  you  say. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  didn't  say  that. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  didn't  weigh  or  measure  a  seal  on  the  islands,  did  you? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  My  recollection  is  that  I  did  not. 

On  pages  639,  040.  Hearing  No.  10: 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Do  you  know  that  Mr.  Fraser  states  ihat  the  process  of  dressing- 
skins  instead  of  stretching  them  rather  shrinks  them? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Xo:  he  hasn't  said  so  anywhere.  Now,  Mr.  Lernbkey  said  on  page- 
442  that  he  had  measured  a  yearling  seal — three  of  them.  He  says  here  [reading]: 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  length  of  a  yearling  seal  on  the  animal  would  be,  from  the 
tip  of  the  nose  to  the  root  of  the  tail,  39^  inches  in  one  instance  and  39£  inches  in. 
another 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes. 
Mr.  LEMBKEY.  And  41  in  another.     I  measuied  only  three. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes.'' 

Do  you  dispute  those  measurements? 

Dr.  'EVERMAXN.  I  do  not  dispute  them. 

On  page  639,  Hearing  No.  10: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now.  you  can  find  exactly  what  was  in  Mr.  Lembkey's  mind  by  turn- 
ing to  page  42s.  ai  the' bottom  of  the  page  [reading]: 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  your  answer? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  certified  that  they  were  all  over  2  years  with  the  exception  of 
the  negligible  few  that  were  taken  through  accident. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  the  spring  of  1910  you  took  12,920  seals.  You  killed  them  there 
under  your  directions,  and  you  took  the  skins. 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  Let  him  answer  the  question. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Is  that  a  question  or  a  statement?  He  is  making  a  statement,  aa 
I  understand  it. 

"The  CHAIRMAN    Answer  the  question. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  did. 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  That  settles  it. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Out  of  the  12.920  skins  which  you  took  through  the  season  of  1910,. 
how  many  of  them  exceeded  in  length  34  inches? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  know." 

Then  he  tells  the  committee  on  page  434  that  7,733  of  them,  according  to  this  London 
certificate,  are  the  skins  of  "small  pups"  and  "extra  small  pups."     And  then  he  re- 
thai  s* ailment  on  page  441  and  quoted  Mr.  Fraser  as  his  authority. 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  So  far  as  I  know,  Mr.  Lembkey  has  not  denied,  and  I  can  say  I 
have  not  denied,  the  classifications  as  given  by  Lampsons.t  If  hey  say  that  there  are 
so  many  extra  small  pups  and  so  many  small  pups,  I  presume  that  classification  is 
correct.  I  am  also  convinced  that  the  statement  which  Lampson  &  Co.  gave  mex 
that  a  skin  35  inches  long  which  they  certified  as  an  extra  small  pup  is  an  extra  small 
pup.  and  that  the  skin  37^  inches  long  which  Lampson  &  Co.  Certified  to  the  Bureau 
of  Fisheries  as  being  a  small  pup  is  a  small  pup  skin. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Were  they  salted  skins? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Those  were  dressed  skins. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  They  were  "doped"  and  dressed  and  fixed  up.  They  were  not  these 
skins,  salted  skins. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  What  do  you  mean  by  "doped  and  dressed?'' 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  They  are  "stretched"  and  "doped"  when  they  are  dressed.  The 
dressers  "dope"  them  with  soap  and  sugar,  and  grease  and  all  sorts  of  things;  puR 
and  tread  them  backward  and  forward  and  stretch  them  into  all  sorts  of  shapes.  That 
is  whit  thev  <  all  "doping." 

V.  Dr.  Charles  H.  Townsend,  member  of  Advisory  Board  Fur-Seal  Service,  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor  (pp.  736,  737,  Hearing  No.  12): 

Mr.  McGiLLicuDDY.  Is  there  any  way  to  determine  the  age  of  a  seal  from  an  exam« 
ination  of  the  skin  after  it  is  taken  off  the  body? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Oh,  yes.  I  think  a  person  handling  a  considerable  number  of 
them  would  be  able  to  throw  out  the  different  ages. 


88  FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

Mr.  McGiLLicuoDY.  There  seems  to  have  been  two  ways  of  determining  the  age  of 
a  seal,  one  is  by  the  measurement  of  the  skin  and  the  other  by  the  weight.  You  are 
familiar,  I  suppose,  with  both  methods? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Only  from  hearsay.  I  do  not  know  that  I  ever  measured  one  or 
«ver  weighed  one. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  You  have  no  practical  information  on  that  subject? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  no  practical  information  on  that  subject.  I  do  not  remem- 
ber that  that  matter  was  ever  in  my  instructions  at  any  time.  I  do  not  remember 
that  I  ever  went  into  it. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  So  far  as  your  information  goes,  which  do  you  regard  as  the 
more  reliable  way  of  determining  the  age  of  a  seal,  by  measurement  or  by  weight? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  can  not  say.     I  have  not  gone  into  that  subject. 

On  page  801,  Hearing  No.  13: 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  has  been  suggested  that  I  ask  a  few  questions  as  to  your  bio- 
logical knowledge,  and,  therefore,  I  proceed  along  that  line.  What  have  you  pub- 
lished officially  as  to  the  size  and  weight  of  fur-seal  skins  as  taken  on  the  seal  islands 
of  Alaska? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  remember  to  have  published  anything  on  that  point. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  do  you  know  of  the  composition  of  the  catch  of  12,920  fur- 
seal  skins  taken  by  orders  of  Hon.  Charles  Nagel,  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
and  Mr.  George  M.  Bowers,  United  States  Fish  Commissioner,  during  the  season  of 
1910  on  the  Pribilof  Islands? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  am  not  posted  on  the  composition  of  that  eaten. 

Hearing  No.  14,  pages  914-919,  as  summed  up  below: 

IV.  Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan,  president  Advisory  Board  Fur-Seal  Service,  etc., 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor  (p.  580,  Hearing  No.  10): 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Are  you  quoting  Dr.  Jordan? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  am  quoting  some  things  that  Dr.  Jordan  has  said. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Is  Dr.  Jordan  a  man  of  truth? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  are  quoting  from  Dr.  Jordan? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  want  to  find  if  Dr.  Jordan  is  a  man  of  truth? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  That  is  not  for  the  witness  to  determine. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  He  is  assailing  me  in  that  matter  and  quoting  Dr.  Jordan. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  witness  can  not  say  whether  he  is  telling  the  truth  or  whether 
he  is  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  would  like  to  have  it  go  in  the  record  whether  he  considers  Dr.  Jordan 
a  man  of  truth. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  witness  will  proceed. 

(And  Dr.  Evermann  proceeds  without  being  able  to  answer  Elliott.) 

VI.  Dr.  Frederic  Augustus  Lucas,  member  Advisory  Board  Fur-Seal  Service, 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor  (p.  726,  Hearing  No.  12): 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes;  I  find  no  fault  with  that  record,  either.  It  is  exactly  as  I 
published  it  nearly  40  years  before.  Now,  Dr.  Lucas,  when  you  take  the  skin  off  that 
yearling  seal  and  salt  it  down,  how  long  is  it? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  do  not  know.     I  have  never  measured  a  skin  after  salting. 

•Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  never  measured  it  before  salting,  did  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  never  measured  the  skin  before  salting. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Neither  before  nor  after?  Then  how  do  you  know  that  in  the  killing 
up  there  they  are  not  killing  yearling  seals? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  By  the  weight  of  the  skins. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  tables  of  salted  weights  published  by  one 
of  your  associates,  of  275  skins,  which  give  a  complete  denial  to  your  statement? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  am  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  have  never  seen  the  table  of  Mr.  Judge? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  presume  I  have  seen  the  table,  but  I  never  noticed  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Two  hundred  and  seventy-five  salted  skins  which  he  \yeighed  shows 
that  a  salted  skin  33  inches  long  will  weigh  as  much  as  a  green  skin  37£  inches  long. 
Does  that  agree  with  your  statement? 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Doctor,  right  there,  you  say  sometimes — 

Dr.  LUCAS.  That  is  equivalent — 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  table  states  it;  he  (Mr.  Judge)  says  these  sizes  of  those  skins  are 
not  fixed  by  weight. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  May  I  make  a  statement?  In  all  these  sales  of  skins  the  skins  are  ad- 
vertised by  weight  and  not  by  size, 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Are  they  advertised  by  weight?  Find  an  advertisement  by  weight  in 
the  Lampson  catalogues  and  you  will  find  something  I  have  never  been  able  to  find. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  89 

Finally  one  man  associated  with  these  experts  of  Secretary  Nagel's 
appointment,  W.  I.  Lembkey,  appeared.  He  did  know  what  n  year- 
ling seal  skin  was,  and  after  a  determined  attempt  to  deny  that  he 
did,  the  following  admission  was  made  by  him  under  cross-examina- 
tion, to  wit  (Hearing  Xo.  9,  Apr.  13,  1912): 

On  page  443: 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  much  can  you  say  is  left  ou  a  yearling  after  you  have  taken 
the  skin  off? 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  How  much  skin  is  left  after  you  have  taken  it  off? 

•"•Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes,  sir:  after  they  remove  it*  for  commercial  purposes  a  certain 
amount  is  left  on. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  stated  about  3  inches. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  that  would  leave  a  yearling  skin  to  be  35  inches  long. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Xo:  if  it  was  39£  inches  long  it  would  leave  it  36£  inches.  That 
is.  all  the  animal  from  the  tip  of  the  nose  to  the  root  of  the  tail  would  be  39£  inches 
long.  Three  inches  off  that  would  leave  36£  inches." 

In  this  distinct  affirmation  and  statement,  Mr.  Lembkey  tells  the  committee  that  a 
"yearling"  fur-seal  skin  of  his  own  identification  and  measurement  is  36^  inches  long. 
It  then  became,  in  order  to  understand  what  the  lengths  of  those  12,920  fur-seal  skins 
were,  which  he  took  during  the  season  of  1910  on  the  Pribilof  Islands,  and  then  certified 
them  into  the  record  of  his  work  as  being — all  of  them — "taken  from  male  seals  not 
under  2  years  of  age."  (See  testimony  Apr.  13,  1912,  pp.  428,  429,  Hearing  No.  9). 

With  the  exhibition  as  above,  of  that  complete  ignorance  of  the 
"scientists,''  we  come  to  the  testimony  of  the  one  man  who  directed 
and  did  the  killing,  and  who  does  know,  to  wit:  (Hearing  No.  14,  p. 
905;  July  25,  1912;  Ho.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

Mr.  Lembkey  having  thus  identified  '-7,733"  of  his  12.920  skins  as  "small  pups" 
and  "extra  small  pups,"  the  committee  then  examined  him  as  to  the  lengths  of  those 
"small  pup"  and  "extra  small  pup"  skins;  he  then  testified  as  follows,  page  441, 
Hearing  No.  9: 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  getting  at  the  analysis  of  your  catch  which  you  have  given 
here  already.  You  have  given  in  a  statement  here  that  8. 000 of  them  were  "small'' 
and  "extra  small." 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  7.700. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  7.700? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  7.733  were  small  and  extra  small  pups. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Fraser  tells  us  that  those  seals,  none  of  them  measured  more 
than  34  biches  nor  less  than  30  inches. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  committee  can  see  what  Mr.  Fiaser  states.  Mr.  Fraser  states 
that  small  pups  measured  33|  inches  in  length." 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  would  that  indicate  as  to  age? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  coming  to  that — 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  From  there  [indicating]  to  there  [indicating]  on  that  diagram — 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  33 J  inches  in  length,  and  extra  small  pups  measured  30  inches 
in  length. 

''Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  you  have  some  extra  small  pups  there  which  makes  it  8.000? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Only  11  of  those. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  It  does  not  amount  to  anything. 

"Mi.  LEMBKEY..  It  just  makes  your  8,000  about  300  more  than  the  actual  number. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  the  reason  I  used  those  round  numbers.  It  doe.*  not  amount 
to  anything  one  way  or  the  other. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  actual  number  is  300  short  of  8,000,  Mr.  Elliott." 

Mr.  Lembkey  thus  testifies  that  his  own  summary  and  official  record  of  the  meas- 
urements of  "7,733  fur  seal  skins."  which  he  took 'during  the  season  of  1910  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands,  declares  the  fact  that  not  one  of  them  exceeds  in  length  34  inches. 
That  fact  determines  them — all 'of  them — to  have  been  the  skins  taken  from  yearling 
seals 

Mr.  MADDEX.  Let  me  ask  you  a  question.  According  to  Mr.  Lembkey 's  testimony 
read  by  you,  he  testified  that  the  length  of  a  yearling  would  be  39£  inches,  and  when 
it  was  skinned  the  skin  itself  would  be  36£  inches.  Does  it  always  follow  that  a  year- 
ling seal  measures  just  the  same  or  within  an  inch  or  two  of  the  same  length? 


90  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  think  the  range  is  about  3  to  4  inches;  a  small  yearling  skin  goes 
30  inches,  a  good  average  yearling  skin  34  inches,  and  a  "long"  yearling  36  im-lic- 
There  are  three  grades. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  All  seals  are  not  of  the  same  size? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No;  but  there  is  the  general  average,  and  you  ran  very  easily  keep 
within  the  limit. 

3.  As  a  warrant  for  the  urgent  need  of  killing  annually  on  the 
islands,  practically  all  of  the  young  male  seals  that  could  be  secured, 
the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  issued  statements  to  the  press,  and  made  a 
sworn  statement  as  follows  to  the  committee,  April  20,  1913  (Hearing 
No.  10,  p.  521,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept,  Com.  &  Labor): 

6.  If  the  surplus  males  are  not  killed,  they  not  only  become  valueless  for  their  skins, 
but  they  grow  up  into  bulls  not  needed  for  breeding  purposes,  but  which  nevertheless 
pass  on  to  the  rookeries,  where  they  do  great  damage  to  the  breeding  herd  by  fighting 


exhausting  their  own  vitality  ana  virility,  ana  renaermg  memseives  less  poieni  man 
they  would  be  without  such  useless  struggle — in  short,  causing  infinite  trouble  and 
injury  to  the  rookeries  without  a  single  compensating  advantage. 

That  this  statement  was  absolutely  without  foundation  in  fact, 
that  it  was  deliberately  put  up  to  the  committee  to  deceive,  and  so 
warrant  this  excessive  and  illegal  killing  on  the  islands  since  1890, 
to  date  of  its  making,  as  above,  has  been  made  a  matter  of  repeated 
record  in  the  hearings  held  from  May  31,  1911,  to  July  31,  1912. 

The  spectacle  of  22  ''distinguished  scientists"  being  invoked  by 
the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  to  sustain  that  untruthful  statement,  when 
each  and  every  one  of  those  "authorities"  have  never  given  out  a 
word  touching  it,  in  all  of  their  writing  and  talking,  that  even  faintly 
asserts  the  same. 

Nothing  of  the  kind  has  ever  been  witnessed  on  the  breeding 
rookeries  by  any  competent  authority,  and  nothing  of  the  kind  ever 
will  be,  since  it  is  not  the  habit  of  these  animals  to  "tear  the  cows  to 
pieces,"  and  "trample  the  helpless  pups  to  death." 

All  of  this  fighting  between  the  bulls  takes  place,  and  is  over  prac- 
tically, every  season,  long  before  the  cows  arrive;  it  was  accurately 
observed  and  published  by  Elliot  40  years  ago.  (See  Mono.  Seal 
Islands,  1874-1882.) 

The  foregoing  briefed  selections  from  the  sworn  testimony  cited, 
declares  that  a  combination  has  existed  between  the  officials  of  the 
Seal  Islands  and  the  lessees'  agents  from  1891  to  1909,  which  was  con- 
tinued in  Washington  between  said  contractors  and  the  Bureau  of 
Fisheries  to  deceive  the  Departments  of  the  Treasury  and  Commerce 
and  the  House  committee. 

It  declares  the  fact  that  this  officialism  and  the  lessees  have  not 
succeeded  in  deceiving  the  committee,  and  the  committee  is  fully 
warranted  in  asking  the  House  to  approve  its  findings  of  fact  and 
recommendations  as  set  forth  in  its  report,  No.  1425,  on  Jan.  31,  1913. 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA.  91 


NEGER,  LUCAS,  TOWNSEM),  AND  EVERMANX  CONSPIRE  WITH  THE 
LESSEES  (LIEBES,  ELKINS,  AND  MILLS)  TO  CONCEAL  THE  FACT  THAT 
THIS  KILLING  ON  THE  ISLANDS  WAS  RAPIDLY  DESTROYING  THE 
FUR-SEAL  HERDS  THEREON,  AS  SAID  LESSEES  WERE  PROSECUTING 
THAT  SLAUGHTER,  1896-1910,  INCLUSIVE. 

Dr.  Jordan  deliberately  falsifies  the  Russian  reccrds  and  the  rec- 
ords <  f  the  slaughter  by  the  lessees,  1896-97,  to  shield  these  public 
enemies  and  enable  them  to  continue  their  illegal  and  ruinous  wcrk. 
(Hearing  Xo.  2,  pp.  65,  66,  June  8,  1911,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
Com.  &  Labor.) 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Way  back  as  far  as  1826  the  Russians  themselves  recognized  the  fact 
that  they  were  culling  the  herds  too  closely — that  they  were  ruining  the  business  by 
the  land  killing  of  all  the  choice  males;  they  knew  that  they  alone  on  the  islands  were 
to  blame,  because  no  such  thing  as  hunting  fur  seals  in  the  water  by  white  men  then 
was  dreamed  of,  much  less  done. 

In  December,  1820.  Gen.  Yanovsky,  the  Imperial  Russian  agent,  sent  over  to  Sitka 
from  St.  Petersburg  in  1818  to  examine  into  the  question  of  that  decline  of  the  fur- 
seal  catch,  then  wrote  to  his  Government  that  "so  severe  is  this  practice  of"  culling 
the  best  males  for  slaughter,  "that  if  any  of  the  young  breeders  are  not  killed  by 
autumn,  they  were  sure  to  be  killed  by  the  following  spring,"  and  urged  the  reforma- 
tion of  this  work  then  on  the  islands. 

Here  is  this  evil  of  overdriving  and  culling  the  herd  presented  and  defined  50  years 
before  I  saw  it  and  nearly  70  years  before  Jordan  denies  its  existence  in  1898.  Think 
of  it.  We  have  sent  two  investigating  commissions  since  1890  up  to  our  ruined  fur- 
seal  preserves  on  the  Pribilof  Islands,  one  in  1891  and  the  other  in  1896-97,  and  yet 
in  spite  of  this  plain  Russian  record  and  my  detailed  and  unanswerable  indictment 
of  that  particular  abuse  in  1890,  these  commissioners  blindly  and  stupidly  deny  it. 
They  attempt  to  set  aside  the  Russian  record  by  saying  that  the  Russians  then  killed 
females  as  well  as  males  and  drove  them  up  to  the  shambles  in  equal  numbers. 

The  Russians  did  nothing  of  the  sort.  They  began  the  season  early  in  June  by 
driving  from  the  hauling  grounds  precisely  as  we  do  to-day  and  continued  so  to  drive 
all  through  the  rest  of  the  season;  they  never  went  upon  the  rookeries  and  drove  off 
the  females:  they  never  have  done  so  since  1799.  How  then  did  the  females  get 
into  their  drives? 

The  females  fell  into  these  drives  of  the  Russians  because  that  work  was  protracted 
through  the  whole  season,  from  June  1  to  December  1.  In  this  way  the  drivers 
picked  up  many  cows  after  August  1  to  10  to  the  end  of  November  following,  since 
some  of  these  animals  during  that  period  leave  their  places  on  the  breeding  grounds 
and  scatter  out  over  large  sections  of  the  adjacent  hauling  grounds,  so  as  to  get  mixed 
in  here  and  there  with  the  young  males.  Thus  the  Russians  in  driving  across  the 
flanks  of  the  breeding  grounds,  going  from  the  hauling  grounds,  during  every  August, 
rnber,  October,  and  November,  would  sweep  up  into  their  drives  a  certain  pro- 
portion of  female  seals  which  are  then  scattered  out  from  the  rookery  organization  and 
are  ranging  at  will  over  those  sections  of  the  hauling  grounds  driven  from.  What  that 
proportion  of  this  female  life  so  driven  was,  in  Russian  time,  no  man  to-day  can  pre- 
cisely determine.  From  the  best  analysis  I  can  make  of  it  I  should  say  that  the 
Russian  female  catch  in  their  drives  never  exceeded  30  per  cent  of  the  total  number 
driven  at  any  time,  and  such  times  were  rare,  and  that  it  ranged  as  low  as  5  per  cent 
of  female  life  up  to  the  end  of  August  annually. 

Now,  what  does  Jordan  say  to-day  about  this  work  which  the  Russians  condemned 
70  years  ago  and  I  in  1890? 

"As  land  killing  has  always  been  confined  to  the  males,  and  as  its  operations  are 
to-day  what  they  have  been  since  the  herd  came  into  the  American  control,  except  in 
so  far  as  they  have  been  improved,  this  means  that  land  killing  is  not  and  has  not 
been  a  factor  in  the  decline  of  the  herd." 

I  went  up  in  1890  prejudiced  against  the  pelagic  sealer.  I  am  yet;  but  prejudice 
can  not  make  answer  to  the  following  facts: 

In  1890  I  found  in  the  place  of  3,193,670  breeding  fur  seals  and  their  young,  only 
959,455. 

In  the  place  of  a  round  million  of  nonbreeding  young  male  seals  on  the  hauling 
grounds  in  1872-1874,  I  found  a  scant  100,000. 


92  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

It  is  and  was  easy  to  account  for  the  heavy  shrinkage  of  life  on  the  rookeries,  for  th<; 
pelagic  sealer  has  been  hard  at  work  on  the  female  life  since  1S85-80;  he  lias  killed 
in  the  water  75  to  80  females  to  every  20  males,  and  this  proportion  in  killing  ought  to 
be  shown  on  the  breeding  grounds.  It  was. 

But  what  about  that  infinitely  greater  loss  among  the  young  nuile.-  on  the  hauling 
grounds?  If  the  pelagic  sealer  was  all  to  blame  (as  Jordan  says  he  is)  for  this  ruin  of 
the  herd,  why  should  this  class  of  seals  of  which  he  kills  the  fewest  be  the  one  class 
most  fearfully  decimated. 

I  began  on  the  ground  in  1890  to  review  every  season's  work  on  the  islands  since 
1874.  I  found  that  in  1883  the  supply  of  surplus  male  seals  had  so  dwindled  on  the 
islands  that  the  driving  was  then  extended  to  all  of  the  hauling  fields;  that  extension 
declared  increased  difficulty  in  getting  the  supply  long  before  the  pelagic  sealer  had 
entered  Bering  Sea  or  had  really  begun  destructive  work  in  the  North  Pacific  Ocean. 

If  the  pelagic  sealer  had  not  caused  this  trouble  on  the  islands  in  1883-1887,  of  get- 
ting the  full  supply  of  killable  young  male  seals,  what  had?  An  epidemic  or  disease? 
No,  not  a  trace  of  it.  Then  there  remained  but  two  reasonable  answers;  either  too 
many  seals  were  annually  killed  by  the  lessees,  or  the  method  of  driving  to  cull  the 
herds  so  driven  was  at  fault. 

The  effect  of  killing  annually  100,000  young  male  seals  of  a  single  high  grade  upon 
the  whole  herd  as  begun  in  1870  was  an  experiment.  It  went  far  beyond  the  Russian 
limit  and  method,  for  it  added  a  much  greater  danger.  It  called  for  the  systematic 
culling  out  of  all  the  seals  driven  under  3  years  of  age  and  over  4  years. 

This  act  of  steadily  killing  every  fine  3-year-old  and  4-year-old  male  that  comes 
up  annually  in  the  drives  began  in  a  few  years  to  create  a  serious  interference  with  that 
law  of  natural  selection  in  the  life  of  the  herd  which  enables  the  fur  seal  to  be  so 
dominant  a  pinniped.  This  interference  is  at  once  seen  by  a  thoughtful  naturalist 
when  the  continued  culling  out  of  the  very  finest  young  male  seals  from  the  herd 
takes  place  annually.  How  long  would  any  stock  breeder  keep  up  the  standard  of 
his  herd  in  this  State  if  he  annually  slaughtered  all  of  the  veiy  finest  young  males 
that  were  born  into  it  or  brought  into  it? 

Yet  Dr.  Jordan  comes  forward  in  his  final  report  with  this  plain  confession  of  his 
inability  to  grasp  a  well-established  truth  in  reirard  to  the  life  of  wild  animals.  Listen 
to  him  (Chap.  IX?  p.  128): 

"The  whole  matter  (theory  of  overdriving)  is  too  absurd  for  serious  consideration, 
and  might  be  passed  by  with  the  silent  contempt  which  it  deserves  were  it  not  for 
the  fact  that  it  was  accepted  by  the  British  commissioners  in  1891  and  made  the 
chief  foundation  of  the  British  contention  before  the  Paris  tribunal  of  arbitration." 

Yet,  curiously  enough,  Dr.  Jordan,  on  page  120,  immediately  preceding  this  dog- 
matic deduction,  cuts  all  the  ground  out  from  under  his  own  feet  in  the  following 
statement : 

"But  suppose  the  killing  was  continued  through  a  series  of  years,  every  3-year-old 
being  killed,  the  reserve  would  in  time  be  cut  off  and  the  stock  of  breeding  bulls 
die  cut.  It  is  impossible  to  say  how  long  it  would  take  to  produce  this  effect,  because 
we  do  not  know  the  length  of  the  life  of  a  bull.  \Ve  may  infer,  however,  that  it  is 
not  lass  than  15  years,  and  therefore  the  injurious  effects  of  this  excessive  killing, 
begun  in  any  given  year  and  continued  indefinitely,  would  not  be  seen  within  10 
years  at  least." 

This  he  publishes  under  the  caption  of  "A  hypothetical  case." 

It  is  not  hypothetical.  It  is  the  real  story  of  the  driving  and  killing  on  the  islands 
from  1880  up  to  1890.  During  all  those  years  I  know,  from  the  records  of  the  work 
and  the  direct  personal  testimony  of  the  men  who  did  the  work,  that  they  never  allowed 
a  3-year-old  seal  to  escape  that  they  could  get.  That  in  1883  they  first  began  to 
fall  behind  in  their  run  of  3-year-old  seals  from  the  hunting  grounds  of  1872-1874, 
which  had  so  abundantly  supplied  them.  Then  they  began  to  extend  their  driving 
to  the  hitherto  untouched  hauling  grounds  of  the  islands,  until  by  1896  they  were 
driving  from  everv  nook  and  corner  on  the  islands  where  a  young  male  seal  hauled 
out,  and  by  1889.  in  spite  of  the  frantic  exertions  that  they  made,  they  got  less  than 
one-quarter  of  their  quota  of  3-year-old  skins.  They  had  to  make  it  up  in  yearlings 
and  "short"  2-year-plds  for  that  year. 

In  the  face  of  this  positive  truth  about  the  woik  of  1889.  which  appears  in  my 
report  of  1890,  Dr.  Jordan,  in  1898,  makes  the  following  strange  blunder  of  statement: 
"To  destroy  this  class  (3-year-olds)  or  any  considerable  number  of  them  would  at  once 
weaken  the  herd.  But  there  would  be  no  object  in  such  killing,  and  it  has  never 
been  thought  of"  (p.  120). 

Never  been  thought  of.  Why,  it  was  the  sole  aim  and  thought  of  the  land  butchers 
to  get  every  fine  3-year-old  and  4-year-old  seal  that  could  be  secured  in  the  seal 
drives  from  1872  to  1890  When  the  supply  of  this  grade  dwindled  on  the  original 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  93 

sources  of  supply  then  the  work  of  driving  from  the  hitherto  untouched  reservoirs  was 
regularly  increased  with  vigor  and  tireless  persistency. 

But  Dr.  Jordan  makes  his  case  still  worse,  for  he  goes  on  to  say  that  this  overkilling 
is  not  practicable.  On  page  121  he  declares:  ''In  the  hypothetical  case  above  cited 
we  have  supposed  that  every  male  of  a  given  age  could  be  taken.  While  in  theory 
tliis  is  possible,  in  practice  it  could  probably  never  be  done.  There  are  certain 
hauling  grounds,  such  as  Lagoon,  Zapadnie  Head,  Otter  Island,  Saevitch  Rock,  and 
Southwest  Point,  from  which  the  seals  have  not  and  never  have  been  driven.  The 
young  males  frequenting  there  were  left  undisturbed.  " 

This  emphatic  statement  by  Dr.  Jordan  is  wholly  and  completely  untrue.  I  have 
the  record  ana  the  proof  that  each  and  everyone  of  these  places  of  retreat  which 
he  names  above  have  been  annually  visited  by  the  sealing  gangs  on  St.  Paul  Island 
since  ISM;  and  these  ••undisturbed''  seals  have  been  regularly  driven  off  from  those 
particular  places,  so  that  they  would  haul  out  on  other  places  where  they  could  be 
taken  more  advantageously,  or  they  were  killed,  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  of 
them,  right  on  the  ground  itself,  notably  on  Southwest  Point  in  1884-1886.  They  were 
entirely  tunted  off  from  other  islands  because  the  law  and  the  lease  does  not  allow 
the  lessees  to  kill  seals  there.  And  this  particular  secret  work  was  in  progress  right  up 
to  the  hour  when  I  stopped  it,  July  20,  1890. 

Now,  who  has  imposed  upon  Dr.* Jordan  with  this  bald  untruth?  Who  has  so  com- 
pletely and  shamefully  misled  him?  What  avails  his  high  personal  character  or  his 
deserved  reputation  as  a  naturalist  when  he  makes  a  gross  and  a  monumental  blunder 
like  this?  A  blunder  upon  which  he  bases  his  whole  defense  of  an  abuse  which  I 
condemn? 

It  is  in  order  now  to  submit  the  proof  that  Dr.  Jordan  has  falsified 
this  island  work  as  to  not  driving  or  taking  of  seals  by  the  lessees  to 
slaughter  from  certain  " reservations"  and  " inaccessible  places."  It 
is  given  in  Hearing  No.  14,  July  25,  1912  (pp.  923-924,  II.  Com. 
Dept.  Com.  &  Labor),  thus: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  One  of  the  most  flagrant  and  inexcusable  matters  of  "scientific :> 
malfeasance  as  to  conduct  of  tl  e  public  business  on  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska  is  tl  at 
repeated  and  untruthful  statement  made  by  Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan  in  1896-1898, 
and  which  I  1  ave  made  the  following  review  of  (see  pp.  66,  67.  Hearing  No.  2,  June 
9,  1911,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  &  Labor"),  and  continued  by  his  associates  ever 
since,  to  wit: 

"But  Dr.  Jordan  makes  his  case  still  worse,  for  he  goes  on  to  say  that  tl  is  over- 
killing is  not  practicable.  On  page  121  he  declares:  'In  the  hypothetical  case  above 
cited  we  have  supposed  that  every-  male  of  a  given  age  could  be  taken.  While  in 
tl  eory  t!  is  is  possible,  in  practice  it  could  probably  never  be  done.  There  are  cer- 
tain hauling  grounds,  such  as  Lagoon,  Zapadnie  Head.  Otter  Island,  Seevitch  Rock, 
and  Southwest  Point,  from  which  tl  e  seals  have  not  and  never  have  been  driven. 
The  young  males  frequenting  there  were  left  undisturbed.'  " 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  submit  1  ere  with,  appended,  tie  following  proof  of  that  erroneous 
statement  made  by  Dr.  Jordan,  as  above  cited,  to  wit: 

Those  '' wlistles"  used  on  St.  Paul,  in  1890,  and  for  driving  off  those  seals  AS  stated 
in  my  notes  following  these  of  St.  George,  were  not  unknown,  it  is  clear,  to  the  lessees 
at  least  six  years  before  I  knew  anything  about  t!  em. 

[Wardman's  Entries.] 

ST.  GEORGE  ISLAND,  July  and  late  June. 

June  2S,  1884-  *  *  First  driving  off  of  the  young  seals  from  under  High 
Bluffs  just  west  of  Stony  Arteet.  The  natives  set  up  small,  noisy  windmills,  spilled 
coal  oil  on  the  rocks,  and  set  a  number  of  small  flags.  *  *  * 

But  a  few  days  afterward  I  [Wardman]  was  astonished  to  see  the  young  seals  all 
back  there  laying  in  and  around  these  windmill  "screechers"  and  the  fluttering 
flags,  showing  no  fear  of  them  whatever.  *  *  * 

Natives  sent  down  every  few  days  with  boats  and  whistles  to  drive  the  holluschickie 
off.  since  they  can  not  round  them  up,  and  kill  on  the  beach  margin — too  narrow. 

[Elliott's  diary,  St.  Pauls  Island,  May  21-Aug.  14,  1890.] 

THURSDAY,  July  3,  1890: 

Palmer,  back  from  Xort'  east  Point  tl  is  evening,  reports  that  all  f!  e  native  sealing 
gang  used  t1  eir  whistles  and  stampeded  the  holluschickie  under  the  bluffs  at  Lukanin 
and  on  Katavie  Point,  as  tl  ey  came  down  with  him;  he  says  that  they  told  him  that 


94  FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

they  all  had  these  whistles  and  used  them  to  drive  seals  out  of  the  rookeries,  especi- 
ally under  these  bluffs  of  Lukanin,  of  the  Reef  and  Seevitchie  Rammers;  also  of  the 
shelf  on  Zapadnie  and  Polovina  Bluffs. 

SATURDAY,  July  5,  1890. 

Tingle  drove  all  the  holluschickie  off  from  the  landing  (at  Otter  Island)  as  soon  as 
we  came  ashore. 

JULY  9,  1890. 

Three  natives  driving  holluschickie  under  tl  e  ''drop"  at  Zapadnie.  They  told 
me  tl  at  they  had  killed  several  thousand  down  tl  ere  on  tl  e  si  elf  in  1887-88,  and 
carried  the  skins  off  in  the  baidar;  only  a  few  here  to-day,  and  so  drove  them  off, 
rather  than  make  a  killing;  also  that  every  one  of  the  S.  W.  Point  seals  were  slaugh- 
tered there  on  the  ground  in  1887-88;  finest  lot  seals  ever  rounded  up,  not  one  under 
size,  and  all  secured. 

[Elliott's  diary  on  St.  Pauls  Island,  May  21-Aug.  14, 1890.] 

THURSDAY,  July  3,  1890. 

Mr.  Goff  l  asked  me  to-night  if  I  was  aware  of  the  fact  that  the  natives  had  been 
ordered  to  sweep  the  bluff  margins  at  Zapadnie  and  strew  broken  bottles,  coal-oil 
cans,  etc.,  on  the  rocks.  I  told  him  that  I  was;  that  this  work  of  hustling  out  every 
young  male  seal  that  could  be  found  hiding  in  the  shelter  of  the  rookery  margins  and 
under  the  high  bluffs  at  Zapadnie,  Polavina,  Lukannon,  and  west  side  of  Reef  Point, 
Sieviethie  Kammen,  and  Otter  Island  was  begun  here  in  1884,  and  also  on  St.  George. 

Mr.  Goff  also  asked  me  if  I  knew  that  the  natives  were  supplied  with  whistles  for 
stampeding  the  holluschickie  on  the  rookery  margins  next  to  the  surf,  and  that  squads 
were  employed  secretly  at  the  work.  I  told  him,  yes;  that  Palmer  l  had  witnessed 
and  heard  such  a  "drive"  under  Lukannon  bluffs,  when  he  was  coming  down  from 
Northeast  Point,  4th  instant.  Palmer  reported  the  occurrence  to  me. 

What  shall  we  do?  As  matters  stand,  do  nothing  but  record  it;  it  simply  shows 
the  extreme  diminution  of  the  young  male  life. 


FRIDAY,  July  4. 

Booterin  and  Artamonov  both  shrugged  their  shoulders  this  morning  when  I  asked 
them  about  the  whistles — "Excuse  me,  please,"  and  off  they  shuffled  with  very 
wise  grins. 

I  cornered  Aggie  Gushing  to-day,  and  he  admitted  that  he  had  been  ordered  to 
"salt"  the  bluff  rocks  at  Zapadnie  in  1889;  that  every  seal  had  been  killed  at  S.  W. 
Point  and  "Kursoolah"  by  the  end  of  the  season  of  1888;  that  this  hauling  ground 
was  not  driven;  the  baidar  came  direct  from  the  village  and  the  men  rounded  the 
seals  all  up  on  the  ground  itself,  killed  and  skinned  them  there,  "all  big  seals;"  "fine, 
very  fine  seals;  none  got  away."  "When  did  you  first  come,  Aggie?"  "June,  1886, 
we  came  first  time."  "Why?"  "Big,  fine  seals,  sir;  get  'em;  every  one,  too." 
"Its  pretty  well  grass  grown  over  there  now;  when  did  you  quit  killing  there?  "We 
got  them  all  in  1888,  sir."  "Why  haven't  any  seals  hauled  there  since?"  "There 
ain't  any  left — they  have  all  gone,  maas  lucken."  "When  do  you  think  the  trouble 
began  here,  Aggie?"  "It  first  became  hard,  Mr.  Elliott,  in  1883,  and  it  has  been 
getting  harder  and  slower  all  the  time."  "Have  you  got  a  whistle,  Aggie?  "  "Yes,' 
and  showed  it  to  me,  slung  under  his  shirt  by  a  neck  string;  it  was  a  regular  pewter 
dog  whistle.  Aggie  begged  off  when  asked  as  to  details  of  the  work  of  the  whistle 
brigade,  and  I  dropped  the  subject. 

DR.     JORDAN     DELIBERATELY    FALSIFIES     THE     RUSSIAN    RECORD    IN    RE 
NOT    KILLING    FEMALE    SEALS., 

Dr.  Jordan  had  full  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  the  Russian  killim 
of  seals  from  the  time  the  old  Russian  American  company  too! 
charge  of  the  Pribilof  herd  in  1800,  up  to  the  day  we  received  it 
from  them  in  1867,  never  permitted  the  killing  of  female  seals 
He,  with  that  full  knowledge  in  his  possession,  after  holding  it  foi 

1  Chas.  J.  Goff,  named  above,  is  dead.  W.  S.  Palmer,  however,  also  named  and  quoted  above,  is  now 
employed  as  one  of  the  curators  and  preparators  in  the  United  States  National  Museum,  Washington 
D.  C.  (M.&y  13,  1913). 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  95 

nearly  two  years,  has  the  following  untruthful  statement  to  finally 
report  under  date  of  February  24,  1898,  relative  to  the  conduct  of 
this  work  of  killing  seals  by  the  Russian  management  of  the  herd,  to 
wit. 

On  page  25,  Fur  Seal  Investigation,  Part  I,  1898,  under  head  of 
the  ''Company's  management,"  he  says: 

AT  ..nee.  upon  assuming  control  of  the  islands,  the  Russian  American  company  put 
a  stop  to  the  ruthless  slaughter  which  threatened  the  fur-seal  herds  with  destruction. 
They  still  continued  to  kill  males  and  females  alike.    The  injury  to  the 
herd  naturally  continued.     *    * 

That  Dr.  Jordan  could  make  such  a  statement  in  distinct  denial  of 
the  only  authority  which  he  has  used,  and  knows,  is  hard  to  believe, 
when  on  page  222,  following,  of  this  same  report  above  cited,  part 
third,  appears  the  following  translation  of  Bishop  Veniammov's  ac- 
count of  this  killing,  which  was  originally  published  in  St.  Peters- 
burg, 1839,  by  Von  Baer,  to  wit : 

The  taking  of  fur  seals  commenced  in  the  latter  days  of  September.  *  *  *  The 
siekatchie  (bulls)  and  old  females  (i.  e..  two  years  and  older")  having  been  removed, 
the  others  are  divided  into  small  squads  and  are  carefully  driven  to  the  place  where 
they  are  to  be  killed,  sometimes  more  than  ten  versts  distant.  *  *  * 

When  brought  to  the  killing  grounds  they  are  rested  for  an  hour  or  more,  according 
t  •  circumstances;  and  then  killed  with  a  club.  *  *  *  Of  those  1  year  old,  the  males 
are  separated  from  the  females  and  killed;  the  latter  are  driven  carefully  back  to  the 
beach. 

Here  is  the  explicit,  clear  cut  statement  made  by  Veniaminov, 
who,  writing  in  1825,  after  a  season  spent  on  St.  Pauls  Island,  denies 
Dr.  Jordan's  assertion  that  the  Russians  killed  male  and  female  seals 
alike,  and  that  that  killing  of  females  destroyed  the  herd. 

And  still  worse  for  Dr.  Jordan,  this  translation  quoted,  was  made 
by  Leonhard  Stejneger,  one  of  Dr.  Jordan's  own  associates  on  the 
Seal  Islands,  in  1896-97. 

There  is  but  one  conclusion  for  any  fair  mind  in  the  premises. 
That  the  Russians  did  not  kill  the  female  seals  is  positively  stated  by 
the  only  authority  who  has  been  invoked  by  Dr.  Jordan  in  the 
premises,  and  who  has  been  translated  at  length  in  Dr.  Jordan's  final 
report,  and  correctly  translated,  as  above  cited. 

In  this  connection  it  is  also  passing  strange  that  Dr.  Jordan  should 
have  gone  out  of  his  way  to  misquote  another  authority  who  has 
explicitly  denied  the  killing  of  female  seals  by  the  Russians.  On  page 
2.").  Jordan's  own  statement  is — 

In  1820  Yanovsky,  an  agent  of  the  Imperial  Government,  after  an  inspection  of  the 
fur-seal  rookeries,  called  attention  to  the  practice  of  killing  the  young  animals  and 
leaving  only  the  adults  as  bleeders.  He  writes:  "If  any  of  the  young  breeders  are  not 
killed  by  autumn  they  are  sure  to  be  killed  in  the  following  spring. " 

Unfortunately  for  Dr.  Jordan,  he  has  not  quoted  Yanovsky  cor- 
rectly. Ilo  has  deliberately  suppressed  the  fact  as  stated  by  this 
Russian  agent,  and  put  another  and  entirely  different  statement  in 
his  mouth;  witness  the  following  correct  quotation  of  Yanovsky: 

In  his  report  No.  41,  of  the  25th  February,  1820,  Mr.  Yanovsky,  in  giving  an  account 
of  his  inspection  of  the  operations  on  the  islands  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  George,  observes 
that  "every  year  the  young  bachelor  seals  are  killed,  and  that  only  the  cows,  seekatchie, 
and  half  siekatch  are  left  to  propagate  the  species."  It  follows  that  only  the  old  seals 
are  left  while  if  any  of  the  bachelors  are  left  alive  in  the  autumn  they  are  sure  to  be 
killed  the  next  spring.  The  consequence  is  the  number  of  seals  obtained  diminishes 
every  year,  and  it  is  certain  that  the  species  will  in  time  become  extinct.  (Appendix 
to  case  of  United  States  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Letter  No.  6,  p.  58,  Mar.  5,  1821.) 


96  FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 

Think  of  this  deliberate,  studied  suppression  of  the  fact  that  the 
Russians  did  not  kill  the  female  seals  thus  made  by  a  ''scientist"  like 
Dr.  Jordan,  as  above.  Why  does  Dr.  Jordan  attempt  to  deceive  his 
Government  as  to  the  real  cause  of  that  Russian  decline  of  the  herd 
between  1800  and  1834?  Why.  indeed,  when  the  truth  is  so  easily 
brought  up  to  confound  him  ( 

Why  does  Jordan  substitute  "breeders"  for  Vanovsky's  "  bache- 
lors"? to  deceive;  for  a  "breed'  female  seal  us  well  as  male, 
and  that  is  precisely  what  Yanovsky  has  stated — that  female  seals 
are  not  killed,  but  the  "young  bachelor"  seals  are:  and  are  all  killed 
in  the  spring  if  they  are  not  so  killed  in  the  autumn  prior. 

Pie  stands  convicted  out  of  his  own  hand  of  having  falsified  the 
record  of  Russian  killing  so  a>  to  justify  the  shame  and  ruin  of  that 
work  of  our  own  lessees,  who  are  thus  shielded  by  him  in  his  official 
report  to  our  Government  dated  February  24,  189X,  and  published 
by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  in  January,  1898,  under  title  of 
"Fur  Seal  Investigation,  parts  1,*  2,  3,  and  4/1898." 

The  record  of  Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan  on  the  killing  grounds  of  the 
Seal  Islands  in  1896-97,  clothed  with  full  authority  to  regulate  the  Icilling 
of  seals,  then: 

VII.  On  July  11,  1896,  less  than  one  month  after  the  publication 
of  those  "Carlisle  rules,"  above  quoted,  Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan 
landed  on  the  Seal  Islands,  clothed  with  a  supervising  power  on  the 
part  of  the  Government  over  all  this  killing  of  the  seals.  He  sends 
to  the  department  a  report  on  this  subject,  and  conceals  from  it  the 
fact  that  those  "Carlisle  rules"  of  May  14,  1896,  have  been  openly 
and  flagrantly  violated  during  the  very  first  season  of  their  publication. 
(See  Preliminary  Report  No.  7,  1896,  p.  21.  Treas.  Doc.  No.  1913,  by 
David  Starr  Jordan.) 

The  department  has  every  confidence  in  Dr.  Jordan  as  a  naturalist, 
who  could  not  be  deceived  as  to  what  "yearling"  seals  were,  and 
accepted  his  indorsement  of  this  work  by  the  lessees  who  killed  those 
yearling  seals  as  above  cited,  in  violation  of  that  specific  prohibition 
by  the  department  and  under  Dr.  Jordan's  supervision. 

But  Dr.  Jordan  did  know  what  a  yearling  seal  was,  and  the  following 
entries  made  in  the  official  journal  declare  it,  for  he  was  busy  in 
securing  them  as  specimens  for  his  own  use,  to  wit:  Under  date  of 
Sunday,  September  27,  1896,  the  following  entry  appears  on  page  53 
of  the  official  journal  of  the  Government  agents  on  St.  Paul  Island : 

13.  The  skin  of  a  yearling  bull,  smothered  in  the  food  drive  trom  Lukannon  was 
taken  for  Stanford  University. 

8.  A  yearling  holluschak  shot  on  reef,  supposed  to  be  a  virgin  cow:  the  skin  taken 
for  California  Academy  of  Sciences. 

Dr.  Jordan  had  with  him  three  naturalists,  who  served  as  his 
subordinates  on  the  occasion  of  his  visit  in  1896  and  again  in  1897  to 
the  Seal  Islands.  These  associates.  Messrs.  Stejneger,  Lucas,  and 
Townsend,  all  united  with  Dr.  Jordan  in  that  report  of  1896  (Treas. 
Doc.,  Xo.  1913,  Nov.  7,  1896),  which  gave  this  illegal  killing  of  year- 
lings in  1896  a  clean  bill  of  health  and  which  is  so  faithfully  "recorded 
in  the  London  sales  sheet,  December  following,  as  being  in  violation 
of  those  rules  of  May  14.  1896.  nbov.  cited 

•T.  Jordan,  at  the  head  of  a  great  university,  should  thus 

conceal  the  truth  about  that  killing  as  above  stated,  seems 

-onable.     What   influence   could   the  lessees  have   over 


FUE-SEAL  HEBD  OF  ALASKA.  97 

him  ?  Leland  Stanford,  Jr.,  University  was  then  governed  by  a  board 
of  trustees,  and  chief  on  that  board  was  one  of  the  lessees,  D.  O.  Mills. 
That  lessee  was  a  commanding  figure.  It  might  have  been  very  un- 
pleasant in  result  for  Dr.  Jordan  had  he  stopped  the  lessees'  work,  as 
ne  should  have  done,  and  reported  their  violation  of  the  Secretary  of 
Treasury's  order  to  the  department,  as  was  his  sworn  duty  to  do. 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  cause  of  Jordan's  dereliction  in  the 
premises,  the  fact  remains  that  he  was  derelict,  and  not  from  want 
of  knowledge  of  what  a  yearling  seal  was. 

On  July  24,  1913,  the  natives  of  St.  Paul  Island,  during  the  course 
of  a  meeting  with  the  agents  of  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures 
in  the  Department  of  Commerce,  on  St.  Paul  Island,  had  this  to  say 
of  Dr.  Jordan  and  this  illegal  work  of  1896  (this  statement  is  a  depo- 
sition duly  taken): 

Question.  When,  after  this  year  (1890),  did  you  get  orders  to  kill  those  small  seals — 
to  kill  all  of  them  that  came  in  the  drives? 

Answer.  In  1896  we  commenced  to  take  the  5-pound  skins,  to  the  best  of  our  rec- 
ollection. 

Question.  Who  directed  this  work  of  killing  the  small  seals  on  the  killing  grounds? 

Answer.  We  do  not  remember;  but  J.  Stanley  Brown  was  the  company's  agent  at 
that  time. 

Question.  Did  the  Government  agents  object? 

Answer.  We  do  not  remember. 

This  shows  that  no  objection  on  the  part  of  the  Government  agents 
was  made,  or  those  natives  surely  would  have  recalled  it,  just  as  they 
remembered  that  this  particular  work  was  begun,  as  stated. 

VIII. — This  work  of  Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan  in  1896,  was  repeated 
by  him  in  1897,  and  the  same  covering  given  to  the  killing  01  small 
seals;  and,  on  page  18  of  his  second  preliminary  report,  dated 
November  1,  1897,  he  says: 

Last  year  the  hauling  grounds  of  the  Pribilof  Islands  yielded  30.000  killable  seals. 
During  the  present  season  a  quota  of  only  20,890  could  be  taken.  To  get  these  it  was 
necessary  to  drive  more  frequently  and  cull  the  animals  more  closely  than  has  been 
done  since  1889.  The  killing  season  was  closed  on  July  27,  in  1896.  This  year  it 
was  extended  on  St.  Paul  to  August  7,  and  on  St.  George  to  August  11.  The  quota 
to  be  left  to  our  discretion,  and  every  opportunity  was  given  the  lessees  to  take  the 
full  product  of  the  hauling  of  grounds. 

ISAAC  LIEBES  SECURES  THE  APPOINTMENT  OF  LEMBKEY  THROUGH 
THE  MEDIUM  OF  DR.  JORDAN  ON  SEPTEMBER  30,  1900,  BY  SECRE- 
TARY GAGE 

We  have  shown  how  the  lessees  managed  to  get  rid  of  Chief  Special 
Agent  Goff  and  Assistant  Agent  Lavender,  and  then  to  suborn 
Assistant  Agents  Murray  and  Nettleton,  who  at  first  had  joined  with 
Goff.  We  have  shown  how  they  secured  the  appointment  of  Williams 
to  succeed  Goff,  and  Ziebach  to  take  Lavender's  place.  We  have 
shown  how  they  secured  the  appointment  of  J.  Stanley  Brown  to  take 
Williams's  place  after  the  latter  had  expressed  his  dislike  of  the  course 
which  he  had  been  ordered  to  pursue  as  GofFs  successor.  We  have 
shown  how  Brown  promptly  made  an  official  order  July  8,  1892, 
turning  the  whole  business  of  driving,  selection,  and  killing  of  seals 
on  the  killing  grounds  to  the  lessees ;  and  we  have  shown  how  Brown, 
for  this  guilty  subserviency  and  malfeasance  as  a  United  States 
agent,  had  been  made  the  "superintendent  of  the  North  American 
21588—13 7 


98  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

Commercial  Co,"  or  the  lessees'  work  on  the  islands  in  1894.  W<> 
have  shown  how  Murray  was  rewarded  by  being  made  chief  special 
agent  in  1887;  and  when  he  died  in  1888  how  John  Morton,  another 
subservient  man,  was  put  in  charge  as  "United  States  chief  special 
agent"  by  the  lessees.  It  now  becomes  necessary  to  show  how 
Liebes  had  W.  J.  Lembkey  appointed  as  Morton's  successor  Septem- 
ber 30,  1900,  which  was  soon  after  Morton's  death  on  the  island  of 
St.  Paul,  July  15,  1900. 

This  record  of  Liebes's  and  Elkins's  (lessees)  influence  is  important 
at  this  juncture,  because  Lembkey  has  been  the  active  official  instru- 
ment which  those  men  have  used  to  secure  illegally  more  than  100,000 
"small  pup,"  or  yearling  seals,  since  1899  up  to  May  1,  1910. 

When  Mr.  Lembkey  was  put  under  oath,  April  13,  1912,  he  swore 
that  he  did  not  know  who  recommended  his  appointment  as  John 
Morton's  successor.  He  testified  to  the  committee  as  follows: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey,  you  were  appointed  when? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Appointed* to  what  position,  sir? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  To  your  office  of  assistant  agent  in  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  In  1899. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  From  what  place  where  you  appointed? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  From  what  place? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes,  from  what  position? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  was  appointed — 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  position  were  you  holding? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  was  holding  a  clerkship  in  the  Treasury  Department  at  the  time 
of  my  appointment. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  appointment  was  dated  when? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  know;  I  do  not  remember. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  About  what  time  did  you  go  to  the  islands  in  1899? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  got  there  some  time  in  May  or  June — I  forget  which;  I  think  May. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Who  was  the  chief  special  agent  in  charge  of  the  islands? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  John  M.  Morton. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  were  you  appointed  as  chief  special  agent  in  charge  of  the  seal 
islands? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Some  time  in  1900.     I  think  in  October. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  were  appointed  to  take  the  position  of  whom? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  John  M.  Morton. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Who  asked  for  your  appointment? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  know. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Is  it  true  that  Mr.  Isaac  Liebes  asked  Dr.  Jordan  to  telegraph  Secre- 
tary Gage  that  you  be  appointed  to  Mr.  Morton's  place? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  did  not  know  Mr.  Isaac  Liebes  at  that  time,  and,  of  course,  I  do 
not  suppose  he  did.  However,  as  I  have  stated,  I  do  not  know  who  made  the  recom- 
mendation. I  am  under  the  impression  the  recommendation  was  made  by  the  super- 
vising special  agent. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  It  was  not  made  by  Dr.  Jordan? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  it.  Dr.  Jordan  himself  has  denied 
that  he  ever  made  any  recommendation  in  the  case.  So  far  as  I  know  I  can  not  answer 
the  question.  I  was  on  the  seal  islands  at  the  time  of  my  appointment. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  were  on  the  seal  islands  at  the  time  of  your  appointment? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  At  the  time  of  my  appointment  as  agent  in  charge. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Morton  died  when? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  He  died  during  my  absence  from  the  islands.  I  think  it  was  in 
July,  1900,  or  June;  I  am  not  certain  which — either  June  or  July  of  1900. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  do  not  know  who  asked  for  your  appointment? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  not  any  knowledge  whatever  on  that  subject.  (Hearing  No. 
9,  p.  425,  Apr.  13;  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.,  C.  &.  L.). 

Lembkey  swears  that  he  does  not  know  who  asked  for  his  appoint- 
ment, as  above-cited  testimony  attests.  The  following  statement  of 
fact  shows  that  Isaac  Liebes,  for  the  lessees,  asked  Dr.  Jordan  to  urge 
Lembkey  as  Morton's  successor,  and  that  Jordan  did  Liebes's  bidding, 


FUR-SEAL  HEED  OF  ALASKA.  99 

and  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  Gage,  September  30,  1900,  in  response 
to  Jordan's  request,  appointed  Lembkey. 

In  April,  1899,  W.  J.  Lembkey,  a  $1,200  clerk  in  the  Customs 
Division,  United  States  Treasury  Department,  was  appointed  to  the 
vacancy  of  an  assistant  special  agent  for  service  on  the  seal  islands. 
At  the  same  time  John  Morton,  assistant  agent,  was  promoted  to  the 
chief  special  agent's  office,  made  vacant  by  the  death  of  Joseph 
Murray,  October,  1898,  at  Fort  Collins,  Colo. 

Morton  and  Lembkey  went  up  together  from  San  Francisco,  and 
landed  on  St.  Paul  Island  on  June  10,  1899.  Morton,  in  August  fol- 
lowing, went  back  to  Washington  for  the  winter,  and  left  Lembkey 
on  St.  Paul  Island  in  charge. 

When  Morton  returned,  June  11,  1900,  to  St.  Paul  Island,  he  found 
Lembkey  ill  and  suffering  from  an  ulcerated  jaw,  or  threatened 
necrosis  of  his  jawbone.  Lembkey  obtained  an  immediate  leave  of 
absence  and  left  the  island  at  once,  on  June  13,  proceeded  direct  to 
San  Francisco  on  Liebes's  chartered  ship,  Homer,  to  go  under  a  sur- 
geon's treatment  when  he  arrived  there  (on  or  about  June  27  or  28, 
or  early  in  July,  1900). 

In  the  meantime  Morton  became  ill,  and  died  July  15,  1900.  He 
died  in  the  Government  agent's  house  on  St.  Paul  Island.  The  news 
of  Morton's  death  reached  Washington  and  San  Francisco  on  or 
about  August  1  to  8  following.  Lembkey,  who  had  in  the  meantime 
been  relieved  by  surgical  treatment,  had  started  back  to  the  islands 
on  the  same  vessel  of  the  lessees  which  had  carried  him  down,  the 
Homer.  She  sailed  on  or  about  August  8  for  this  return  trip  to  St. 
Paul.  Before  he  left  San  Francisco,  and  while  down  there  on  this 
errand,  as  above  stated,  he  was  a  frequent  visitor  to  the  office  of  Isaac 
Liebes,  on  those  matters  of  business  which  were  connected  with  his 
Hying  on  the  islands  with  his  family  free  of  ah1  cost  for  board,  together 
with  service  for  not  himself,  but  for  his  wife  and  daughter.  He  also 
had  the  business  of  his  passage  up  and  down  free  for  his  wife  and 
daughter  on  that  vessel,  and  himself,  if  his  allowance  of  $600  per 
annum  for  traveling  expenses  did  not  meet  his  own  trip  costs  to  and 
from  Washington. 

Thus  Mr.  Lembkey  became  very  well  acquainted  with  Mr.  Liebes, 
and  the  seals  never  failed  to  form  a  common  bond  of  interest.  Liebes 
soon  knew  Lembkey  well. 

When  Liebes  learned  of  Morton's  death,  as  usual,  he  at  once  looked 
for  a  " proper  successor"  for  the  man  whom  he  could  trust  as  a 
United  States  agent  in  charge.  He  sent  word  to  David  Starr  Jordan, 
then  at  Palo  Alto,  that  he  (Liebes)  desired  him  (Jordan)  to  telegraph 
Secretary  Gage  of  the  immediate  need  for  selection  of  a  fit  successor 
to  John  Morton,  and  that  he  (Jordan)  desired  the  appointment  of 
W.  J.  Lembkey;  that  was  done  by  Jordan,  on  or  about  August  25 
or  28,  or  thereabouts.  On  September  30,  1900,  Gage  ordered,  as 
Morton's  successor,  the  appointment  of  Lembkey,  and  notified  Ezra 
W.  Clark  that  he  had  done  so  at  the  request  of  Dr.  Jordan.  Clark 
had  been  promised  the  place  and  did  not  fail  to  tell  why  he  had 
lost  it. 

It  will  be  observed  that  Lembkey  swears  that  he  does  not  know 
who  urged  his  appointment;  he  was  on  the  seal  islands  at  the  time 
of  his  appointment;  he  arrived  on  the  islands — after  leaving  San 
Francisco  on  the  Homer,  August  8 — on  the  19th  of  August,  1900. 


100  FUR-SEAL  HEED  OF  ALASKA. 

Since  his  appointment  was  not  made  until  September  30  following, 
at  Liebes's  and  Jordan's  inspiration,  he  did  not  get  news  of  it  until 
the  folio  whig  season,  early  in  May. 

Now  let  us  see  what  Dr.  Jordan  has  to  say  about  this,  after  he  had 
been  charged  with  this  nomination  of  Lembkey  (by  Henry  W. 
Elliott).  He  addressed  a  letter  to  President  Roosevelt,  dated 
January  16,  1906,  in  which  he  made  the  following  evasive  reference, 
to  wit: 

I  may  say  incidentally,  with  reference  to  the  concluding  remark  of  Mr.  Elliott  in 
his  letter,  that  while  I  formed  a  very  favorable  opinion  of  Mr.  Lembkey  during  his 
incumbency  of  a  position  in  the  Treasury  Depaitment  in  1896-97,  it  is  not  just  to 
him  to  say  that  "he  owes  his  appointment"  to  my  nomination.  Nor  is  it  fair  to 
hold  Mr.  Lembkey  responsible  for  the  failure  to  solve  these  scientific  questions. 
They  demand  a  training  which  he  doubtless  has  not  had,  and  in  any  event  they  could 
not  have  been  worked  out  successfully  in  addition  to  the  ordinary  duties  and  respon- 
sibilities of  his  position.  The  natiiialist  who  is  to  understand  the  herd  must  spend 
practically  all  his  time  in  observation  of  the  rookeries. 

Against  this  evasive  answer  (no  denial)  of  his  part  in  securing 
Lembkey' s  appointment,  the  files  of  the  Treasury  will  show,  in  the 
appointment  clerk's  office,  that  telegram  from  Jordan,  which  urged 
the  appointment  of  Lembkey,  and  which  secured  it. 

Later,  in  1905,  Lembkey,  fearing  the  result  of  an  examination  into 
his  work  at  the  islands  by  Mr.  F.  H.  Hitchcock,  in  1905-6,  "cast  an 
anchor  to  the  windward,"  and  told  the  truth  October  26,  1905,  about 
the  effect  of  the  killing  by  the  lessees  (pp.  157-179,  Appendix  A.). 

The  moment  that  Lembkey  understood  that  the  lessees  had  pre- 
vented Hitchcock  from  visiting  the  islands  (early  in  1906),  he 
(Lembkey)  returned  to  his  service  of  the  lessees,  abjectly  and  shame- 
fully; ate  his  own  words  of  truth,  and  joined  with  Jordan  in  the 
usual  annual  eulogy  of  the  " benevolent  killing"  on  the  islands,  and 
the  hypocritical  cry  of  "  terrible  destruction  by  the  pelagic  sealers," 
etc.,  as  the  following  exhibit  clearly  declares,  to  wit: 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY, 

Washington,  October  26,  1905. 

SIR:  I  have  the  honor  to  submit  the  following  report  on  the  administration  of  affairs 
on  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska  during  the  year  ended  August,  1905: 

There  were  so  few  bulls  on  certain  rookeries  on  St.  Paul  Island  this  summer  that,  by 
reason  of  their  scarcity,  the  harems  were  broken  up  before  the  usual  period  and  bachelors 
were  able  to  haul  among  the  cows. 

This  occurred  at  a  date  when  these  young  seals  should  have  been  excluded  from 
the  breeding  ground  by  vigilant  bulls,  and  then  forced  to  haul  up,  if  they  desired  to 
haul  at  all,  only  on  tha  bachelor's  hauling  ground. 

This  condition,  in  our  opinion,  is  due  to  the  scarcity  of  breeding  males  on  the  rookeries 
generally,  and  to  their  being  so  taxed  in  special  localities  with  the  service  of  the  cows 
that  they  were  unable  or  unwilling  to  drive  out  the  bachelors.  Had  idle  bulls  been 
sufficiently  numerous  this  condition  would  not  have  occurred. 

The  present  scarcity  of  bulls  is  attributable  directly  to  close  killing  on  land,  from  which 
not  enough  bachelors  were  allowed  to  escape  from  the  killing  fields  to  maintain  the 
requisite  proportion  of  bulls. 

Respectfully,  W.  I.  LEMBKEY, 

Agent  in  Charge  Seal  Islands. 
The  SECRETARY  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR. 

But,  in  1913,  h3  has  another  " report"  to  make — to-wit: 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  number  of  breeding  bulls  on  the  island,  as  found  bv  the  fore- 
going census,  is  1,356  active  and  329  idle,  a  total  of  1 ,685  bulls  ready  for  service.  With 
39,400  breeding  and  10,297  virgin  females,  occupied  with  1,356  active  bulls,  the 
average  harem  is  only  36.  The  329  idle  bulls  which  did  not  secure  cows  during  the  summer 
will  serve  some  of  the  2-year-old  or  virgin  cows  coming  in  for  their  initial  impre 


PUB-SEAL  HEBD  OF  ALASKA.  101 


in  the  fall,  and  would  reduce  the  size  of  the  average  harem  to  30. '^a  pilrf'?f.tiv"ricTn»*l 
ratio  of  the  sexes. 

It  might  be  claimed  that  the  size  of  the  herd  of  .idle  bulls  is  very  small,  and  that 
therefore  not  enough  male  seals  escape  the  killing  grounds  to  maintain  an  ideally 
healthy  relation  between  breeding  males  and  females.  It  is  true  that  the  number  of 
idle  bulls  is  small,  but  proportionately  it  is  as  large  as  any  true  friend  of  the  seals 
would  desire.  With  a  total  of  only  1,685  adult  bulls  present,  the  idle,  329,  represent 
19  per  cent,  or  nearly  one-fifth,  of  the  whole  number  present.  This  number  has  not 
been  estimated,  but'has  actually  been  counted  one  by  one,  so  that  the  presence  of 
these  bulls  is  not  in  the  least  a'matter  of  conjecture,  but  is  an  assured  fact.  With 
1  bull  idle  out  of  every  5  present,  not  even  the  most  radical  critic  could  fail  of  conviction 
that  an  ample  surplus  of  male  life  exists,  and  for  this  reason  the  killing  of  male  seals 
on  land  has  not  been  of  such  a  nature  as  to  endanger  in  any  way  the  safety  of  the  herd  or 
its  future  increase.— (Hearing  No.  9,  p.  368,  Feb.  29,  1912,  H.  Com.  Dept.  Com.  & 
Labor. 

NOTE. — There  is  no  breeding  after  August  1,  annually,  and  no  one  knows  it  better 
than  Lembkey.— H.  W.  E. 

GUILTY    KNOWLEDGE    OF    THE    BUREAU   OF    FISHERIES. 

That  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  had  complete  knowledge  of  the  fact 
that  these  "loaded"  weights  which  are  certified  into  the  skin  records 
of  killing  and  taking  by  the  lessees  did  not  govern  the  size  or  value  of 
them  when  sold  is  admitted,  under  oath,  as  follows : 

Mr.  MADDEN.  The  point  is,  does  the  weight  of  the  skin  have  anything  to  do  with  the 
value  of  the  skin? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  weight  of  the  skin,  in  my  opinion,  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
value  of  the  skin. 

Mr.  MADDEN*.  Is  it  sold  by  the  pound,  or  how? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Xot  by  the  pound,  by  the  size — the  amount  of  tur  on  it.  If  we  should 
leave  5  pounds  of  blubber  on  the  skin  there  would  only  be  so  much  fur  on  it  for  the 
garment  maker  to  make  the  garment  of. 

Mr.  McGiLLicuDDY.  If  you  took  a  young  skin  and  for  the  purpose  of  making  it  appear 
by  v:  eight  older,  you  could  deceive? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.   We  certainly  could  deceive.     We  could  fill  it  with  any  sort  of  substance. 

Mr.  McGiLLicrDDY.  You  say  measurement  would  not  be  reliable  because  it  might 
be  stretched.  Suppose  you  did  not  stretch  it,  suppose  you  take  it  honestly,  then 
would  it  be.  if  honestly  taken,  would  it  be  a  test? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  tried  to  make  that  clear  to  the  committee. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  That  is  a  direct  question.     Why  do  you  not  answer  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  am  attempting  to.  It  is  impossible;  of  course  all  our  actions  up 
there  are  honestly 

Mr.  MADDEN  ( interposing) .  Answer  the  question  right  straight.  Do  not  try  to 
explain  it. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  attempted  to  state  that  in  measuring  a  green  skin  it  is  impos- 
sible to  find  out  its  exact  length  when  you  lay  it  on  the  ground,  because  it  may  curl 
up,  or  roll,  or  stretch,  and  it  can  only  be  measured  after  it  has  become  hardened  by  salt. 

Mr.  McGiLLicuDDY.   Then  it  mil  not  stretch f 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.   Certainly  not. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  That  is  the  proper  time  to  measure  it,  after  it  has  become  rigid 
and  stiff? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.    You  can  not  then  stretch  or  shrink  iff 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Me  <  TiLLicuDDY.  With  an  honest  measurement  of  that  kind  of  skin  would  it  not  deter- 
mine the  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  fancy,  yes. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  Is  there  any  doubt  about  itf 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  thi?ik  so.  I  say  fancy,  because  I  never  attempted  to  judge 
of  age  by  the  measurements. 

Mr.  McGiLLicrDDY.  In  that  way,  if  anybody  wanted  to,  they  could  not  deceive, 
because  you  say  they  could  not  stretch  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  You  could  not  stretch  it  after  it  had  been  salted  four  or  five  days, 
because  the  skin  then  is  not  very  pliable. 


102  ^        v  V  r  V;  ^F^JR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

ifr  is  your  idea  that  measurement  is  reliable  after  a  certain 


number  of  days? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes,  after  it  has  been  in  salt,  but  when  the  skin  is  green  it  would  not 
be  a  reliable  test.  (Hearing  No.  9,  pp.  399-400,  Feb.  29,  1912,  Ho.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
Com.  and  Lab.) 

Here  the  chief  special  agent  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  in  charge 
of  the  seal  islands  distinctly  tells  the  committee  that  when  those 
skins  taken  by  him  have  been  in  salt  "four  or  five  days"  they  can  not 
be  stretched  or  shrunken;  that  they  are  then  fixed  for  a  reliable 
measurement,  and  so  fixed  when  they  leave  the  islands  for  the  London 
sales. 

Then,  later  on,  this  chief  special  agent  in  charge  of  the  seal  islands, 
when  asked  by  the  committee  to  give  his  measurements  made  by 
himself  of  a  yearling  seal  of  his  own  identification  as  such,  he  swears 
(on  pp.  442,  443)  as  follows  (Hearing  No.  9.): 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Now,  Mr.  Elliott,  proceed. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey,  do  you  know  the  length  of  a  yearling  seal  from  its 
nose  to  the  tip  of  its  tail? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No,  sir,  not  off-hand. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  never  measured  one? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Oh.  yes,  I  have  measured  one. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  no  record  of  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  a  record  of  it  here. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  is  its  length? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  length  of  a  yearling  seal  on  the  animal  would  be.  from  the  tip 
of  the  nose  to  the  root  of  the  tail.  39$  inches  in  one  instance  and  39\  in  another  instance — 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  And  41  in  another  instance..    I  measured  only  three. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  you  take  a  skin  off  of  that  yearling  seal,  how  much  of  that  skin  do 
you  leave  on  there? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  You  do  not  leave  very  much  on  the  tail  end  there  [indicating];  not 
nearly  so  much  as  your  sketch  would  show. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  It  does  not  matter. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.   We  leave  about  3  inches,  perhaps,  on  the  head. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  much  can  vou  say  is  left  on  a  yearling  after  you  have  taken  the 
skin  off? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  How  much  skin  is  left  after  you  have  taken  it  off? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes,  sir;  after  they  remove  it  for  commercial  purposes  a  certain  amount 
is  left  on. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  /  stated  about  3  inches. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.   Then  that  would  leave  a  yearling  skin  to  be  35  inches  long. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No;  if  it  was  39%  inches  long  it  would  leave  it  36%  inches.  That  is,  all 
the  animal  from  the  tip  of  the  nose  to  the  root  of  the  tail  would  be  39£  inches  long. 
Three  inches  off  that  would  leave  36^  INCHES. 

In  this  distinct  and  explicit  statement,  Mr.  Lembkey  tells  the  com- 
mittee that  a  yearling  seal  skin  of  his  own  identification  and  measure- 
ment is  86%  inches  long,  and  that  its  measurement  as  such  is  fixed 
and  constant  after  "four  or  five  days  in  salt." 

On  page  447,  he  admits  to  the  committee  that  the  official  classifi- 
cation of  his  catch  of  12,920  seal  skins  taken  by  him  in  1910  and 
measured  in  salt  carries  7,733  skins  which  are  less  than  34  inches 
long  (or  are  yearling  skins),  any  one  of  them,  as  follows: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  getting  at  ths  analysis  of  your  catch  which  you  have  given  here 
already.  You  have  given  in  a  statement  here  that  8,000  of  them  were  "small"  and 
"extra  small." 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  7,700. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  7,700? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  7,733  were  small  and  extra  small  pups. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Fraser  tells  us  that  those  seals  none  of  them  measured  more  than 
34  inches  nor  less  than  30  inches. 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA.  103 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  committee  can  see  what  Mr.  Frascr  states.  Mr.  Fraser  states  that 
small  pups  measured  33\  inches  in  length. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  From  there  [indicating}  to  there  [indicating]. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Thirty-three  and  three-quarters  inches  in  length,  and  extra  small  pups 
measured  30  inches  in  length. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  you  have  some  extra  small  pups  there  which  makes  it  8,000. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Only  11  of  those. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  It  does  not  amount  to  anything. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  just  makes  your  8,000  about  300  more  than  the  actual  number. 

Mr.  Lembkey  can  not  sensibly  dispute  the  fact  that  he  has  taken 
7,733  "yearling"  seals  in  1910;  and  this  done  in  open  violation  of 
the  law  and  regulations  of  the  department  which  he  is  sworn  to  obey 
and  enforce,  and  which  he  quotes  to  the  committee  (on  p.  372)  as 
follows  : 

Mr.  MADDEN.  If  they  were  killed  it  would  be  a  violation  of  law. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  would;  if  the  regulations  permitted  it,  however,  it  would  be  in 
accordance  with  existing  law. 

It  should  be  remembered  also  that  the  law  does  not  prohibit  the  killing  of  any  male 
seal  over  1  year  or  12  months  of  age,  although  regulations  of  the  department  do  prohibit 
the  killing  of  anything  less  than  2  years  old,  or  those  seals  which  have  returned  to  the 
islands  from  their  second  migration. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.   That  is  a  regulation  of  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Laborf 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Of  Commerce  and  Labor;  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Let  me  before  you  pass  from  that  ask  this:  You  weigh  these  green 
skins  on  the  islands,  and  then  measure  them  in  the  markets  in  London.  What  is  your 
purpose  in  weighing,  and  what  is  their  purpose  in  measuring? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Our  purpose  in  weighing  the  skins  on  the  island  is  to  get  them  within 
the  weights  prescribed  by  the  regulations.  Our  regulations  prescribe  maximum  and 
minimum  weights.  Those  weights  are  5  pounds — 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Does  that  relate  to  the  question  of  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Five  pounds  and  eight  and  one-half  pounds. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Passing  from  the  weight,  in  London  what  is  the  determining  purpose  in 
measuring? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.   They  measure  them,  I  fancy — 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Are  they  trying  to  arrive  at  the  question  of  age,  too? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  are'trying  to  get  the  size  of  the  skin  or  the  amount  of  fur  on  the 
animal . 

Mr.  YOUNG.  They  care  nothing  about  the  question  of  age  there? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Nothing  at  all. 

Mr.  YOUNG  .  That  is  all  I  care  to  ask. 

That  these  natives  know  what  they  are  doing  when  directed  by 
the  lessees  to  kill  seals,  the  following  testimony  of  Chief  Special  Agent 
Lembkey  fully  attests;  it  is  found  on  page  58  of  manuscript  notes 
of  V»  ays  and  Means  hearing,  January  25,  1907. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  may  say.  Mr.  Chairman,  that  the  clubbers  on  the  island  are  expert 
in  their  business,  and  they 'can  determine  the  weight  of  a  skin  on  a  live  seal  to  within 
a  fraction  of  a  pound. 

Mr    GROSVENOR.  That  is  all  I  wanted  to  know. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  also  know  the  age  of  a  seal  from  his  appearance. 

Manuscript  notes,  page  59: 

Mr.  CLARK.  These  experts  can  tell  a  4-year-old  from  a  3-year-old,  can  they? 
Mr.  LEMBKEY.  By  looking  at  him. 
Mr.  CLARK.  By  looking  at  him? 
Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes. 
Mr.  CLARK.  They  are  pretty  expert. 
Mr.  XEEDHAM.  Are  these  killers,  "natives"? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes,  they  are  natives.  I  can  state  positively  that  they  arrive  at 
that  degree  of  experience. 


104  FUR-SEAL  HEED  OF   ALASKA. 

We  find  that  on  May  14,  1896,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  in- 
structed the  agents  in  charge  of  the  seal  islands  to  permit  "no  taking 
of  seals  that  had  skins  less  than  6  pounds  in  weight,"  or  "yearlings." 
This  order  is  entered  at  length,  at  page  14,  of  the  official  record  or 
journal,  of  the  special  agent,  St.  Paul  Island,  on  June  17,  1896.  In 
1900,  Chief  Special  Agent  Lembkey  (succeeding  John  Morton,  who 
died  that  year)  submits  a  report  to  the  Treasury  Department  for  this 
season's  work  of  1900  (as  well  as  1901),  in  which  he  says: 

In  1900  the  standard  was  lowered  from  6  pounds  to  5  pounds,  being  the  first  time  in 
the  history  of  this  business,  and  as  many  5-pound  skins  as  could  be  found  were  taken. 

An  inspection  of  the  official  journal  of  the  chief  special  agent,  St. 
Paul's  Island,  for  the  season  of  1900,  fails  to  show  any  entry  of  any 
order  from  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  which  rescinds  that  official 
order  of  May  14,  1896,  and  which  would  be  in  the  same  official  log 
book  if  made.  By  what  authority  was  this  killing  which  Mr.  Lemb- 
key, and  which  the  London  records  certify  to — by  what  legal  or  moral 
authority  was  that  killing,  as  well  as  "the  taking  of  skins  weighing 
less  than  6  pounds  or  yearlings,"  made  during  this  season?  None, 
whatever. 

In  1904,  following  the  visit  of  Senators  Dillingham,  Nelson,  Burn- 
ham,  and  Patterson  (this  killing  of  those  yearling  seal  having  been 
noticed  by  those  Senators  on  the  islands  August  3,  1903),  they  intro- 
duced a  bill  which  suspended  entirely  the  work  of  the  lessees  on  these 
islands.  That  causecf  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  Mr. 
Cortelyou,  to  come  forward  and  engage  to  check  up  this  work  of  killing 
the  small  seals  and  yearlings,  and  on  his  pledge  the  Senators  refrained 
from  pressing  that  bill.  He  accordingly  issued  what  is  known  as  the 
Hitchcock  Rules,  ordered  May  1,  1904,  which  forbade  the  killing  of 
"any  seal  having  a  skin  weighing  less  than  5^  pounds  or  any  seals  un 
der  2  years  of  age." 

We  now  reach  that  combination  made  between  the  lessees  and  the 
Government  agents  to  evade  this  order  of  the  Hitchcock  Rules ;  when 
Hitchcock  left  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor  early  in  1905 
these  men  went  to  work  as  follows: 

An  unwilling  confession  was  made  by  Lembkey  of  that  guilt  of 
nullification,  when  cross-examined,  under  oath,  before  the  House 
Committee  on  Expenditures  Department  Commerce  and  Labor,  Feb- 
ruary 20-April  13,  1912.  (See  pp.  363,  458,  Hearing  No.  9.) 

This  conspiracy  to  enable  D.  0.  Mills,  United  States  Senator  Elkins, 
and  Isaac  Liebes,  as  lessees,  to  enrich  themselves  at  the  public  cost 
and  credit,  has  been  shielded  and  approved  by  the  ''scientific" 
"  Advisory  Board  on  Fur-Seal  Service,  '  with  Dr^  David  S.  Jordan, 
as  " president"  of  the  same. 

Liebes  and  Lembkey  got  together  to  nullify  the  Hitchcock  Rules 
in  1906,  which  ordered  the  reservation  of  2,000  young  male  seals 
(1,000  2-year-olds  and  1,000  3-year-olds),  annually  before  the 
lessees'  killing  began,  this  reservation  being  ordered  thus,  to  pre- 
vent the  swift  impending  rum  of  all  male  breeding  seal  life  on  the 
rookeries. 

In  further  proof  of  the  fact  that  Lembkey  knew  he  was  killing 
those  "reserved"  3-year-old  seals,  so  as  to  meet  the  wishes  of  Liebes, 
the  following  official  evidence  is  submitted. 

In  1905  First  Assistant  Agent  Judge,  finding  that  he  was  killing 
in  October  and  November,  1904,  all  of  the  3-year-old  seals  which 


FUR-SEAL  HEED   OF   ALASKA.  105 

had  been  ''reserved'7  and  "immune"  from  slaughter  in  June  and  July 
previously,  he  made  a  clear  pointed  statement  to  that  effect  in  his 
annual  report,  dated  June  5,  1905,  to  wit: 

To  remove  all  possibility  of  killing  branded  seals  in  the  fall  on  which  the  brands 
have  become  indistinct  it  will  be  necessary  to  prohibit  the  slaughter  of  any  animal 
the  skin  of  which  weighs  over  6  pounds.  (Kept.  Agt.  Jas.  Judge,  p.  180;  Appendix 
A;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  &  Labor,  June  24.  1911.) 

Now,  in  the  face  of  this  distinct  proof  given  him  as  above,  that  he 
must  make  a  6-pound  maximum  limit  for  food  skins,  or  let  the  lessees 
continue  to  nullify  the  Hitchcock  Rules,  does  W.  I.  Lembkey  do  so? 
Observe  the  following  sworn  statement  by  him  that  he  does  not — 
that  he  kills  them  all : 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Right  there.  Mr.  Lembkey.  did  you  prohibit  their  killing  them? 
Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  did. 
Mr.  McGuiRE.  Over  4  years  of  age? 
Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  did. 
Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  1904° 
Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes. 
Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  do  it  in  1905? 
Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  did  you  do  it?    You  had  no  brand  on  them. 
Mr.  LEMBKEY.  By  fixing  a  limit  of  8£  pounds  on  the  skins  to  be  taken.     (Hearing 
No.  9.  p.  458,  Apr.  13,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  &  Labor.) 

BRIEF    SUMMARY   OF   THAT   SWORN   TESTIMONY   WHICH   DECLARES   THIS 

'GUILTY  COLLUSION — IN  NULLIFYING  THE  HITCHCOCK  RULES. 

Lembkey,  February  4,  1911,  declares  "the  weight  of  a  3  year  old 
skin  is  7  pounds"  and  to  "save  the  3  year-olds  "  he  has  ordered  "no 
skins  taken  which  ar<  over  6%  pounds." 

[Hearing  No.  14,  p.  907,  July  25,  1912.] 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  Mr.  Chairman,  in  the  matter  of  the  nullification  of  the  Hitch- 
cock rules,  with  this  evidence  duly  considered  by  your  committee  of  the  illegal 
killing  of  those  yearling  seals  in  1910  (and  that  evidence  of  this  guilt  applies  to  every 
season's  work  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  ever  since  1S90  down  to  May  1,  1910\  I  desire  to 
present  the  following  testimony,  which  declares  that  ever  since  May  1,  1904,  when 
the  "Hitchcock  rules"  were  first  ordered  by  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
those  rules  have  been  systematically  and  flagrantly  violated  by  the  agents  of  this 
department  who  were  specially  sworn  to  obey  and  enforce  them." 

On  February  4,  1911,  Chief  Special  Agent  Lembkey  was  introduced  by  Secretary 
Charles  Nagel  to  the  United  States  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation  of  National 
Resources,  and  during  his  examination  by  that  committee  he  made  the  following 
statement,  to  wit,  on  page  14  (hearings  on  Senate  bill  9959,  February  4,  1911,  Com- 
mittee on  Conservation  of  National  Resources): 

"Dr.  HORNADAY.  HOT.V  many  'short  2-year-olds'  were  killed  last  year? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  understand  your  term.  No  seals  under  2  years  old,  to 
my  knowledge,  were  killed. 

"  Dr.  HORNADAY.  What  would  be  the  age  of  the  smallest  yearlings  taken? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Two-year-olds  rarely,  If  any.  I  may  state  here,  Dr.  Hornaday, 
that  a  great  difference  of  opinion  exists  between  Mr.  Elliott  and  the  remaining  people 
who  understand  this  situation.  There  is  a  great  gulf  between  their  opinions,  and 
it  ran  never  be  reconciled  on  the  question  of  the  weights  of  skins  of  2-year-olds. 

"Prof.  ELLIOTT.  I  will  present  my  information  in  a  moment. 

"Dr.  HORNADAY.  The  minimum  weight  is  what? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Five  pounds.  During  food  drives  made  by  the  natives,  when 
the  seals  killed  are  limited  to  6%  pounds,  in  order  to  exclude  all  these  3-year-olds  branded 
during  the  summer,  you  understand  the  natives  do  kill  down  a  little  more  closely  than 
our  regulations  allow,  for  the  reason  that  they  need  the  meat,  and  since  they  have  to 
exclude  all  these  fine,  fat  seals  over  6%  pounds  they  go  for  the  little  fellows  a  little  more 
closely. 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  How  many  seals  were  killed  last  year  for  food  by  the  natives? 


106  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  limit  was  2,500.  Speaking  offhand,  I  think  about  2,300 
were  killed. 

"Q.  Were  any  females  killed? — A.  No,  sir;  not  to  my  knowledge,  and,  as  1  stated, 
I  carefully  interrogated  these  two  gentlemen  who  had  charge  of  this  killing,  and 
they  stated  that  to  their  knowledge  no  female  was  killed . 

"Q.  What  class  of  males  were  killed  by  the  natives/or  food?— A.  Under  6$  pounds- 
Then,  soon  after  stating  that  "6?  pound"  limit.  Lembkey  admitted 
that  he  did  not   put  that  reservation  down  to  "6^  pounds"  until 
proof  had  been  given  him,  that  an  8-£  pound  skin  limit  did  not  spare 
those  3  year  olds  (and,  he  did  not  fix  that  limit  even  then),  to  wit: 

[Dixon  Hearing,  p.  19,  Feb.  4,  1911.1 

Senator  HEYBURN.  State  the  document  and  the  page  from  which  you  read. 

Prof.  ELLIOTT.  Senate  Document  No.  98,  Fifty-ninth  Congress,  first  session,  page 
86.  Here  is  the  official  report  of  Mr.  W.  I.  Lembkey,  in  which  the  preservation  and 
protection  and  conservation  of  this  seal  life,  which  he  so  graphically  described  to 
you  a  moment  ago,  is  blown  clear  out  ol  water  by  its  own  force  of  official  denial. 

REPORT  OF  AGENT  JAMES  JUDGE. 

ST.  GEORGE  ISLAND,  June  5,  1905. 

DEAR  SIR:  I  have  the  honor  to  submit  the  following  report  of  affairs  on  St.  George 
Island,  covering  the  interval  from  August  14,  1904,  to  date: 

SEALS. 

On  October  7  Little  Bast  Rookery  was  carefully  gone  over  for  the  purpose  of  counting 
dead  pups,  but  none  were  found. 

At  that  season  foxes  in  greater  or  less  numbers  are  always  present  on  the  rookeries 
and  quickly  eat  the  pups  or  older  animals  that  may  happen  to  die.  Pup  skulls  were 
frequently  found  during  September  in  the  rear  of  the  rookeries,  where  they  had 
undoubtedly  been  left  by  the  foxes,  the  bodies  having  been  devoured. 

Further  counting  of  dead  pups  was  therefore  not  attempted,  as  it  seemed  a  disturb- 
ance of  the  seals  to  no  good  purpose. 

The  first  food  drive  was  made  October  19;  killed,  59;  dismissed,  6  large,  197  small, 
and  6  brands.  Two  of  the  latter  were  from  St.  Paul.  While  all  brands  were  very 
faint,  those  made  with  shears  were  less  discernible  than  those  made  with  hot  irons. 
Just  the  slightest  trace  of  a  brand  on  one  of  the  dead  informed  us  that  the  wrong  animal 
had  been  knocked  down.  The  skin  weighed  8  pounds.  That  other  3-year-olds  branded  in 
the  spring,  on  which  the  fur  had  grown  out  so  that  the  brand  had  become  obliterated,  were 
also  killed  is  more  than  probable,  as  69  per  cent  of  the  dead  skins  weighed  7  pounds  a 
over,  the  heaviest  iveighing  9  pounds. 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  May  I  interrupt  the  gentlemen  just  a  second  to  ask  whether  th 
report  does  not  state  that  Mr.  Judge  at  once  took  measures  to  prevent  the  killing  of  any 
more  of  these  branded  seals  by  limiting  the  weights  of  skins  to  6\  pounds,  a  practice  which 
has  been  followed  ever  since? 

Did  Lembkey  tell  the  truth?     No;  he  deliberately  denies  under  oat] 
April  13,  1912,  what  he  asserts  as  above  in  re  a  "6^-pound  limit" 
thus  admits  his  guilt  in  the  premises,  as  below,  to  wit: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  what  follows,  gentlemen  of  the  committee — does  he  make  the 
order  of  reservation?  No;  he  actually  nullifies  it,  and  unwittingly  confesses  that  ma 
feasance  in  the  following  sworn  statement  made  to  your  committee  April  13  last, 
page  458,  Hearing  No.  9,  Lembkey  affirms: 

'Mr.  McGuiRE.  Right  there,  Mr.  Lembkey,  did  you  prohibit  killing  them? 

'Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  did. 

'Mr.  McGuiRE.  Over  4  years  of  age? 

'Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  did. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  1904? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes. 

'Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  do  it  in  1905? 

'Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes. 

'  Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  did  you  do  it?    You  had  no  brand  on  them. 

'Mr.  LEMBKEY.  By  fixing  a  limit  0/8%  pounds  on  the  skins  to  be  taken." 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


10' 


Now.  what  has  become  of  that  "6$-pound"  3 -year-old  limit  by  which  he  has  sworn  he 
11  saved  the  3-year-olds"  in  June  and  July,  to  be  again  "saved"  by  him  as  such  in  the 
autumn  following  by  having  this  maximum  limit  of  "6^  pounds"  put  on  the  taking 
of  any  "food  skins'"?  Why.  they  are  all  killed. 

Mr!  MADDEN.  How  many  people  are  theie  on  the  islands? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  About  300:  about  250  now.  Why.  those  3-year-olds  so  saved  are  all 
killed  later  in  the  season,  and  so  killed  as  being  under  the  limit  of  "8£  pounds"!  He 
thus  stupidly  confesses  to  you.  as  above  quoted,  that  he  has  nullified  the  very  rules  of 
the  depaitment  that  he  was  and  is  sworn  to  obey  and  enforce. 

The  Hitchcock  rules  ordered  a  ''permanent  mark"  to  be  put  upon  these  reserved 
seals,  uand  under  no  circumstances  are  they  to  be  taken,"  etc.  Why  was  it  not  done? 
The  answer  is  easy.  The  lessees  wanted  those  skins,  and  they  manipulated  Lembkey  as 
above — they  got  them.1 

The  natives  made  no  mistake — not  at  all — ''they  took  those  4- 
year-olds  for  3-year-olds"  just  because  the  lessees'  agents  ordered 
them  to  do  so.  E.  W.  Clark  is  not  telling  all  of  the  truth — only  part 
of  it,  for  good  reasons  of  his  own,  perhaps! 

ST.  GEORGE  ISLAND,  August  14,  1907. 

DEAR  MR.  LEMBKEY.  It  has  occuned  to  me  that  you  may  wish  a  formal  statement 
regarding  the  marking  of  the  young  male  seals  at  this  island  for  a  breeding  reserve. 
The  following  is  a  statement  in  detail: 


Date. 

Rookery. 

2  years 
old. 

3  years 
old. 

4  years 
old. 

June    12 

Starava  Artel... 

29 

32 

20 

17 

North 

14 

14 

11 

19 

Zapadni 

14 

18 

15 

20 

East                        

26 

28 

15 

21 

Starava  Artel 

68 

61 

6 

25 

East          

38 

37 

14 

27 

Zapadni 

11 

12 

4 

Total  

200 

202 

85 

\Vhile  the  marking  of  4-year-old  seals  is  not  enjoined.  I  deemed  it  wise  to  mark  these 
which  the  natives  caught,  believing  that  if  they  would  make  the  error  of  taking  these 
seals  for  three  years  old  when  we  were  branding  they  were  likely  to  make  a  similar 
error  when  we  came  to  killing,  and  it  was  a  good  plan  to  render  such  seals  immune 
for  the  season. 

Our  selection  of  seals  for  breeding  was  of  the  first  class,  and  the  marks  remain  as 
conspicuous  now  as  when  first  applied. 

Very  respectfully.  EZRA  W.  CLARK. 

Assistant  Agent  in  Charge. 

1  The  manner  in  which  they  were  "reserved"  and  then  taken  is  set  forth  as  follows: 

3.  The  reserve  of  bachelors.— Beginning  with  the  season  of  1904,  there  has  been  set  aside  each  spring  a 
special  breeding  reserve  of  2,000  young  males  of  2  and  3  years  of  age.  These  animals  have  been  marked  by 
clipping  the  head  with  sheep  shears,  giving  them  a  whitish  mark  readily  distinguishing  them  to  the  club- 
bers. They  are  carefully  exempted  on  the  killing  field  and  released. 

This  method  of  creating  a  breeding  reserve  seems  open  to  considerable  criticism,  and  has  apparently  been 
only  moderately  successful.  The  mark  put  upon  the  animal  is  a  temporary  one.  The  fur  is  replaced 
during  the  fall  and  winter,  and  the  following  spring  the  marked  seals  can  not  be  recognized.  The  animals 
being  2  and  3  years  of  age  are  still  killable  the  next  season,  the  2-year-olds  in  fact  the  second  season.  A  new 
lot  of  2,000  is  clipped  the  next  season,  and  these  are  carefully  exempted,  but,  except  in  so  far  as  animals 
of  the  previous  season's  marking  are  reclipped,  thev  have  no  protection  the  second  season,  and  without 
doubt  are  killed. 

If  such  is  not  the  case,  it  is  difficult  to  understand  what  becomes  of  them.  ( Report  of  G.  A.  Clark,  p.  847, 
Appendix  A,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  and  L.) 


108 


FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 


(Appendix  A,  p.  533,  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  the  Department  of 
Commerce  and  Labor,  June  24, 1911.) 


THE    DEADLY    PARALLEL. 


LemlTcey  says  the  3-year-olds 
and  other  holluschickie  are  not 
driven  out  from  shelter  of  the  breed- 
ing cows. 

Chief  Special  Agent  LEMBKEY: 

"Furthermore,  the  3-year-olds,  having 
passed  the  age  of  puberty,  are  not  found 
on  the  hauling  grounds  during  the  fall, 
but  are  hauled  among  the  cows  on  the 
rookeries  when  they  can  not  be  driven. 
This  is  an  additional  safeguard  against 
their  killing,  and  of  itself  would  disprove 
any  allegation  that  these  marked  seals  are 
subsequently  killed."  (Report,  Dec.  14, 
1906.  S.  Doc.  376,  p.  13,  60th  Cong.  1st 


But  his  assistant  tells  him  that 
they  are  so  "pulled  out  from  among 
the  cows." 


Assistant  Agent  JAMES  JUDGE: 

''Seals. — Four  hundred  and  fifty-eight 
seals  of  the  quota  of  500  allowed  the  na- 
tives of  this  island  for  food  were  obtained. 
The  first  drive  was  made  on  October  19, 
from  Staraya  Artel,  and  220  seals  were 
killed;  209  small,  sixty-five  3-year-olds, 
five  4-year-olds,  six  5-year-olds,  two 
6-year-olds,  and  4  branded  were  turned 
away.  Three  other  drives  were  made  as 
follows:  October  31,  Staraya  Artel  rook- 
ery, 148  seals  were  killed ;  twelve  3-year- 
olds  released;  November  9,  Staraya  Artel 
and  North,  44  seals  killed;  November  16, 
North  rookery.  25  seals  killed;  October  20 
to  November  10,  Zapadni  Guards,  21  seals 
killed. 

"The  last  three  drives  were  made  up 
entirely  of  seals  pulled  out  from  among 
the  cows  by  the  natives,  and  as  very  care- 
ful selection  had  taken  place  on  the  rook- 
ery very  few  were  turned  away  from  the 
killing  field."  (Report  June  3.  1907,  S. 
Doc.  376,  p.  105,  60th  Cong.,  1st  sess.) 

And  in  final  and  complete  proof  of  this  guilty  knowledge  possessed 
by  Liebes,  Lembkey,  Evermann,  and  Bowers,  as  lessees  and  officials, 
that  these  " reserved"  seals  were  being  taken  in  violation  of  regula- 
tions, the  deadly  parallel  is  drawn  upon  them,  thus: 

Lembkey  declares  that  the  reg-  But  Evermann  furnishes  the 
ulations  "  order  no  food  skins  taken  committee  with  copies  of  these 
over  6%  pounds":  and  that  he  faith-  regulations  which  order  "  no  food 
fully  obeys  them:  skins  taken  over  8%  pounds "- 

and  thus  confessing  the  deceit  of 
Lembkey!  (and  himself  also). 


Mr.  LEMBKEY: 

Notwithstanding  repeated  allegations  to 
the  contrary,  the  regulations  of  the  depart- 
ment fully  protect  the  breeding  herd  and  these 
regulations  are  carefully  and  thoroughly 
observed.  They  require  that  no  female  or 
'marked  male  should  be  killed,  and  no  male 
seal  having  a  pelt  weighing  less  than  5  or 
more  than  8£  pounds.  During  the  food 
killing  season  of  the  fall  and  spring  seals 
having  skins  weighing  over  6\  pounds  or 
under  5  pounds  may  not  be  taken,  this 
extra  limitation  being  enforced  to  prevent 
the  killing  of  those  males  marked  for  breeding 
purposes  after  the  new  hair  has  grown  in  and 
obliterated  the  mark  which  is  placed  upon 
their  hides  at  the  beginning  of  the  season . 


Dr.  EVERMANN: 

I  wish  to  call  particular  attention  to 
these  paragraphs  of  the  instructions  re- 
garding reservations  to  be  made: 

[Instructions  issued  Mar.  9,  1906.] 

SEC.  8.  Sizes  of  killable  seals. — No  seals 
shall  be  killed  having  skins  weighing  less  than 
5  pounds  nor  more  than  8$  pounds.  Skins 
weighing  more  than  8£  pounds  shall  not  be 
shipped  from  the  islands,  but  shall  be  held 
there  subject  to  such  instructions  as  may 
be  furnished  you  hereafter  by  the  depart- 
ment. Skins  weighing  less  than  5  pounds 
shall  not  be  shipped  from  the  islands,  un- 
less, in  your  judgment,  the  number  thereof 


FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 


109 


Mr.  MADDEN.  Right  there,  let  me  ask  a 
question. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  I  do  not  think  it  will 
interfere.  You  said  that  seals  two  or 
three  years  of  age  were  killed? 

Mr.  'LEMBKEY.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  And  that  no  skin  weighed 
less  than  5  or  more  than  8  pounds? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  More  than  8£  pounds. 

Air.  MADDEN.  Except  during  a  certain 
period  of  the  season  when  the  higher  weight 
was  reduced  to  6$  pounds  f 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.    Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  What  becomes  of  the 
seals  more  than  3  years  of  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  are  allowed  to 
mature  as  breeders.  (Hearing  No.  9,  p. 
363,  Feb.  29, 1912,  House  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
Commerce  and  Labor.) 


is  so  small  as  to  justify  the  belief  that 
they  have  been  taken  only  through  un- 
avoidable accident,  mistake,  or  error  in 
judgment. 

SEC.  9.  Killing  season. — The  killing 
season  should  begin  as  soon  after  the  1st  of 
June  as  the  rookeries  are  in  condition  for 
driving.  Seals  shall  not  be  killed  by  the 
lessee  later  than  July  31.  No  seals  what- 
ever shall  be  taken  during  the  stagey  sea- 
son. The  killing  of  pups  for  food  for  the 
natives,  or  for  any  other  purpose,  is  not  to 
be  permitted. 

SEC.  10.  Seals  for  food. —  The  number  of 
seals  to  be  killed  by  the  natives  for  food  for 
the  fiscal  year  beginning  July  1, 1906,  shall 
not  exceed  1,700  on  the  island  of  St.  Paul 
and  500  on  the  island  of  St.  George,  sub- 
ject to  the  same  limitations  and  restrictions 
as  apply  to  the  killing  of  seals  by  the  com- 
pany for  the  quota.  Care  should  be  taken 
that  no  branded  seals  be  killed  in  the 
drives  for  food. 

[Instructions  issued  Apr.  15,  1907.] 

SEC.  6.  Quota. — Identical  with  instruc- 
tions of  1906. 

SEC.  7.  Reservation  of  young  males. — 
Identical  with  instructions  of  1906. 

SEC.  8.  Sizes  of  killable  seals. — No  seals 
shall  be  killed  having  skins  weighing  less 
than  5  pounds  nor  more  than  8%  pounds. 
Skins  weighing  less  than  5  pounds  or  more 
than  8£  pounds  shall  not  be  shipped  from 
the  islands,  but  shall  be  held  there  subject 
to  such  instructions  as  may  be  furnished 
you  hereafter  by  the  department. 

SEC.  9.  Killing  season. — The  killing 
season  should  begin  as  soon  after  the  1st  of 
June  as  the  rookeries  are  in  condition  for 
driving.  Seals  shall  not  be  killed  by  the 
lessee  later  than  July  31.  The  killing  of 
pups  for  food  for  the  natives,  or  for  any 
other  purpose,  is  not  to  be  permitted. 

SEC.  10.  Seals  for  food. — Identical  with 
instructions  of  1906. 

[Instructions  issued  Apr.  1,  1908.] 

SEC.  6.  Quota. — Identical  with  instruc- 
tions of  1907. 

SEC.  7.  Reservation  of  young  males. — 
Identical  with  instructions  of  1906  and 
1907. 

SEC.  8.  Sizes  of  killable  seals. — Identical 
with  instructions  of  1907. 

SEC.  9.  Killing  season. — Identical  with 
instructions  of  1907. 

SEC.  10.  Seals  for  food. —Identical  with 
instructions  for  1907.  (Hearing  No.  10, 
pp.  483-484,  Apr.  19,  1912,  House  Com. 
Exp.  Dept.  Commerce  and  Labor.) 


110  FUK-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 

When  the  Hitchcock  rules  were  first  published  the  lessees  were 
shocked,  and  at  once  took  Lembkey  to  task — how  could  he  do  such 
an  act  ? 

Lembkey  tells  them  that  Elliott  did  it — that  HE  was  not  to  blame,  and 
that  Elliott  was  the  "pest"  that  prevented  Lembkey  from  fully  serving 
Liebes.  Under  examination  April  13,  1912,  he  testifies— 

[Hearing  No.  9,  p._.455.] 

Mr.  ELLIOTT  (reads  from  Lembkey 's  letter  to  Hitchcock,  May  20,  1904): 

"When  I  pointed  out  that  my  instructions  were  not  discretionary,  he  stated  that 
he  would  at  once  protest  to  the  department.  He  requested  that  I  inform  him  by 
official  letter  of  the  requirement,  which  I  did,  and,  at  his  urgent  request,  inclosed  a 
copy  of  your  letter.  I  have  taken  pains  to  explain  to  him  the  situation  that  existed 
in  Washington  last  winter,  and  that  the  attitude  of  .the  department  is  not  one  of  hos- 
tility to  the  company,  but  necessary  to  avoid  sinister  results." 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Sinister  results? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes.     [Reading:] 

•  •  While  admitting  in  one  breath  '  a  knowledge  of  the  Elliott  campaign — 
You  told  Mm  I  did  this  thing,  did  you  not? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  certainly  did. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  glad  you  did. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  told  him  that  you  were  the  greatest  pest  the  department  ever  had. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  glad  to  hear  that.     That  is  music  to  me. 

Before  this  order  was  made,  May  1,  1904,  we  find  Lembkey  busy 
with  Jordan  and  working  with  Liebes  for  the  illegal  killing  of  small 
seals. 

Lembkey  tried  to  prevent  the  U5j-pounds  limit"  being  ordered  in 
1904,  and  confesses  the  attempt,  under  cross-examination  to  the 
committee,  thus — 

[Hearing  No.  9,  p,  449,  Apr.  13,  1912.] 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey,  in  1904  the  Hitchcock  rules  were  first  published,  I  believe 
Have  they  been  changed  since  then? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.    Yes,  they  have. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  As  to  killing  any  seal  under  2  years  of  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Not  so  far  as  to  killing  any  seal  under  2  years  of  age,  but  in  1906  they 
were  changed  so  as  to  make  the  minimum  weight  5  instead  of  5%  pounds. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.   Why  did  the  department  fix  5\  pounds  in  1906? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Now  you  are  asking  me  something.  Mr.  Elliott,  I  do  not  believe  I 
am  qualified  to  answer;  just  how  the  department  arrived  at  an  opinion  of  that  kind 
would  hardly  be  a  question  for  me  to  testify  to. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.    You  were  not  consulted? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  was  not  consulted  when  the  order  was  written. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  all  I  wanted  to  get  at,  sir.     In  1900  and — 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  will  state,  however,  that  I  made  a  recommendation  to  the  effect  that 
weight  be  decreased  from  5\  pounds  to  5  pounds,  if  that  is  what  you  have  reference  to. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Oh,  you  did.     Did  you  make  that  recommendation  in  1904? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  If  I  remember  correctly  I  recommended  to  Mr.  Hitchcock  that  the  mini- 
mum weight  in  1904  be  fixed  at  5  pounds. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.    Yes\  and  Mr.  Hitchcock  overruled  you. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  say  that  he  overruled  me.     He  fixed  the  weight,  accordii 
to  his  published  statement,  at  5\  pounds  so  that  there  would  be  absolutely  no  question  as  U 
the  fact  that  the  seals  taken  were  over  2  years  of  age. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Were  "not  under  2  years  of  age?" 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Over  2  years  of  age. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Does  not  this  regulation  say  "under  2  years  of  age?" 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  guess  we  are  talking  about  the  same"  thing  only  we  do  not  recognis 
it.  He  said  there  should  be  no  question  of  the  fact  that  the  skins  taken  were  over 
years  of  age.  I  presume  that  is  what  you  mean,  too. 


PUB-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA.  Ill 

Finding  that  they  c  >uld  ii'.t  get  any  change  in  the  rules  tf  May  1, 
1904,  ordered,  so  that  they  might  he  easier  to  nullify  on  the  islands 
(for  nullify  them  the  lessees  at  (  nee  did),  they  sets  to  work  and 
LembJcey  got  busy  with  Liebes  in  planning  a  change  in  the  rules  of  the 
Hitchcock  Order  of  May  1 ,  1904,  which  prevented  them  from  taking  year- 
linys.  without  a  good  deal  of  trouble. 

They  Nft(n-«/«/  in  IWt.  '  i ftn-  Hitchcock  left  the  Department  of  Corn- 
in  t  ret  and  Labor,  and  not  until  then. 

After  Mr.  Hitchccck  went  into  the  Postmaster  General's  office, 
March.  1905,  Lembkey  succeeded  in  lowering  the  minimum  SJ-pound 
standard  weight  set  by  "Hitchc  ck  rules,"  to  5  pounds  by  March  9, 
1906,  and  so  took  the  ''yearlings''  for  the  lessees,  easier,  as  "2-year- 
old  male  seals."  and  falsely  certified  them  as  such!  The  lessees  not 
only  objected  to  tin  ~)±- pound  limit  which  shut  out  the  yearlings,  but 
th(  y  claimed  the  right  to  kill  all  the  ^-year-old*  as  well!  as  shown  by  the 
folioiriny  testimony  in  II  f  a /ing  Xo.  9,  p.  4'54>  April  13,  1913,  to  wit: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  these  Hitchcock  rules  v:ere  published  in  1904,  and  you  went  out  to 
San  Francisco,  was  any  protest  made  to  you  by  the  lessees? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  You  know  perfectly  well  that  there  was,  Mr.  Elliott. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.   What  did  you  tell  them,  Mr.  Lembkey? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Perhaps  since  you  have  in  mind  my  report  for  1904  which  makes 
mention  of  those  protests  from  the  company,  I  had  better  refer  to  those  so  that  the  com- 
mittee may  know  just  exactly  what  was  done.  On  page  81  of  Appendix  A  of  these 
hearings  in  which  is  published  my  annual  report  as  agent  in  charge  of  the  seal  fisheries 
for  the  year  1904  I  discuss  the  following  under  the  subheading  ';  protests  from  the 
company" : 

''While  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.  complied  in  every  particular  this  sum- 
mer with  the  regulations  of  the  department,  I  received  from  its  officers  several  protests 
against  the  department's  action  in  restricting  the  catch  of  the  company." 

This  report  is  addressed  to  Mr.  Hitchcock: 

"  L'pon  receipt  of  your  letter  of  May  12  last  prescribing  a  5^-pound  limit  on  2-year-old 
skins,  I  notified  Mr.  Taylor,  the  president  of  the  company,  of  the  contents  of  the  letter. 
He  at  once  entered  a  vigorous  protest.  Upon  my  informing  him  that  I  had  no  option 
in  the  matter,  he  appealed  directly  to  the  department,  and  held  the  company's  vessel 
in  Sausalito  for  half  a  day  until  the  receipt  of  the  department's  reply.  With  that  mat- 
ter, however,  you  are  familiar. 

"Upon  arrival  at  the  islands,  while  discussing  the  coming  season's  work  with  Mr. 
Redpath,  the  company's  general  agent.  I  mentioned  the  prohibition  against  the  killing 
of  4-year-olds,  and  stated  that,  to  give  effect  to  this  prohibition,  I  would  place  a  limit 
on  large  skins  of  from  8£  to  9  pounds.  Mr.  Redpath  at  once  expressed  surprise  at  the 
existence  of  this  prohibition  and  entered  a  vigorous  protest  against  any  interference 
with  the  killing  of  4-year-olds.  He  produced  a  copy  of  the  department's  instructions 
to  me  and  quoted  from  the  clause  relating  to  the  restriction  of  killing  in  support  of  his 
argument." 

Then  finding  that  there  was  an  easy  way  to  nullify  these  ''reserva- 
tions" of  the  Hitchcock  Rules,  the  lessees  quickly  used  a  pair  of 
sheep  shears  and  "branded"  the  "spared"  seals  as  follows:  All  this 
done  with  the  servile  collusion  of  the  agents  of  the  Government : 

To  provide  a  definite  reserve  of  male  life  for  breeding  purposes  the  agents  tell  me 
they  drove  up  in  the  early  part  of  the  season,  and  before  killing  was  begun  by  the 
company.  2,000  bachelor  seals  of  2  and  3  years  of  age  and  shaved  their  heads  with  sheep 
shears,  thus  marking  them  so  that  they  can  be  identified  by  the  clubbers  and  exempted 
on  the  killing  field.  These  shaved  heads  constitute  a  large  part  of  the  animals  turned 
back  at  each  killing.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  among  those  turned  back  without  brand 
there  are  none  which  show  evidence  of  the  clipping  of  kst  season.  It  may  be  inferred, 
therefore,  that  the  fur  and  water  hair  is  replaced  during  the  winter.  The  identification 
mark  is  not  a  permanent  thing,  but  one  designed  to  serve  for  the  current  killing  season. 
To  insure  these  animals  exemption  for  breeding  purposes  next  year  they  must  be  again 
shaved  next  June. 


112  FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 

In  the  killing  this  morning  it  may  be  noted  that  27  animals  with  shaved  heads, 
designated  as  3-year-olds,  were  released,  but  of  the  unbranded  animals  released  only 
5  are  designated  as  4-year-olds.  It  is  only  a  supposititious  case,  but  if  we  assume  that 
twenty-seven  3-year-olds  were  exempted  by  the  shaving  of  last  season,  here  are  only 
5  that  have  successfully  run  the  gauntlet  of  the  second  year. 

In  a  word  the  marking  of  a  2  or  3  year  old  seal  by  a  temporary  mark  which  is  obliter- 
ated by  the  following  season,  the  animal  still  being  kill  able  as  a  3  or  4  year  old,  is  futile 
for  the  purpose  of  establishing  a  breeding  reserve. 

There  is  another  criticism  that  may  justly  be  brought  against  this  method  of  marking; 
that  is,  clipping  or  shaving  the  head — it  does  not  in  any  way  impair  the  value  of  the 
skin.  Undoubtedly  this  is  a  provision  to  prevent  loss  through  carelessness.  If  a 
clubber  accidently  strikes  a  shaved  seal  its  skin  is  as  good  as  any  other,  and  such 
accidents  occur,  although  infrequently. 

The  criticism,  however,  lies  in  this:  The  skin  is  just  as  valuable  to  the  pelagic  sealer 
as  if  it  were  not  marked.  The  shaving  of  the  head  is  a  good  plan  for  identification  by 
the  clubber.  It  would  be  unwise  to  attempt  to  burn  a  brand  on  the  seal  at  this  point, 
but  while  the  animal  is  caught  for  the  purpose  of  shaving,  a  permanent  burned  brand 
should  be  placed  on  the  back  or  shoulder  which  will  mar  the  value  of  the  skin  to  the 
pelagic  sealer.  If  it  mars  the  value  of  the  skin  also  from  the  company's  point  of  view, 
then  greater  care  should  be  taken  in  clubbing  the  animals.  The  present  plan  puts  a 
premium  on  carelessness,  and  an  animal  exempted  this  season  is  liable  to  be  killed 
next  season.  The  only  way  to  prevent  this  is  to  shave  the  head  of  this  year's  2-year-old 
next  year  as  a  3-year-old,  and  again  as  a  4-year-old  the  third  season;  all  of  which  is  a 
useless  waste  of  energy.  (Report  Geo.  A.  Clark,  Sept.  30,  1909,  pp.  885,  886;  Appen- 
dix A,  June  24,  1911;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  &  Labor.) 

In  getting  the  Hitchcock  minimum  limit  of  "5%  pounds"  REDUCED  to 
"5  pounds"  Lemblcey  and  Liebes  succeeded  in  getting  it  done  without  any 
warrant,  in  1906,  and  so  confess  it}  when  cross-examined,  to  wit: 

[Hearing  No.  9,  pp.  449-451,  450,  April  13,  1912.] 

• 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey,  when  you  made  that  statement  in  1901,  you  went  to 
Mr.  Hitchcock  and  recommended  a  5-pound  limit.  What  did  he  tell  you  in  1904? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  remember  just  what  he  did  tell  me,  Mr.  Elliott. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  he  not  tell  you  that  you  were  taking  yearling  skins? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No,  sir;  he  told  me  that  you  had  made  the  charge  that  we  were  taking 
yearling  skins. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Was  he  not  impressed  with  the  fact  that  you  were  taking  yearling 
skins? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No,  he  was  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.    Yet  he  fixed  the  limit  Jive  and  one-half  pounds? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  He  did  it  solely  as  I  have  stated — to  place  the  limit  so  high  that  you 
nor  any  other  man  could  make  any  objection  to  the  policy  of  the  department. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  was  very  correct  on  his  part,  was  it  not? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Never  mind  about  that. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  Mr.  Hitchcock  left  the  department  who  succeeded  him? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  As  chief  clerk?    I  think  Mr.  Bowen  did. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Bowen.     Did  you  again  renew  your  recommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  remember  that  I  recommended  that  the  weight  be  reduced 
to  5  pounds  in  1905,  Mr.  Elliott. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.   That  order  of  reduction  was  made  in  1906? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  In  1906. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Who  was  the  chief  clerk  then? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  presume  Mr.  Bowen  was. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  you  again  made  the  recommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Not  to  Mr.  Bowen;  no.     The  recommendation  was  made,  I  think, 
the  Secretary,  but  it  was  made  through  Mr.  Sims,  the  solicitor  of  the  department,  wh( 
then  had  charge  of  the  seal  business. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  any  table  of  weight  measurement  of  your  own  making  whi< 
warranted  you  in  making  that  recommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  had  not.     I  expressed  that  as  my  opinion. 


FUK-SEAL    HERD   OF   ALASKA.  113 

THE  "SALT  WEIGHT"  DECEPTION  BY  LEMBKEY,  IN  1904;  REPEATED  BY 

MARSH,     1911:    AND    SWORN    TO,    BY    EVERMANN,    JULY    30,     1912,   IN 
ORDER  TO  DECEIVE    AND   FALSIFY  THE  RECORD  OF  KILLING  YEARLING 


The  trick.— He  "shakes  all  the  salt  of,"  then  weighs  them  after  six 
rwg. 

(P.  79.-Appendix  A;  Lembkey,  Sept.  7,  1904.] 
EXPERIMENTS    IX    WEIGHTS    OF   SALTED    SKINS. 

In  connection  with  the  weighing  of  individual  skins  on  the  killing  field,  it  was 
thought  wise  to  determine  whether  or  not  skins  gained  or  lost  weight  after  being  salted. 
Should  any  discrepancy  of  this  kind  occur,  the  weights  of  these  skins  in  London 
would  not  coincide  with  those  taken  on  the  islands. 

On  July  17.  107  skins  taken  at  Tolstoi  were  weighed  individually,  and.  after  being 
immersed  in  salt  water  to  keep  them  moist  during  the  journey  from  the  field  to  the 
salt  house,  were  salted.  Their  aggregate  weight  on  the  field  before  wetting  was  705 
pounds.  On  July  28  they  were  taken  out  of  salt  and  reweighed,  when  their  aggregate 
weight  was  759^  pounds,  a  gain  of  5-H  pounds  on  107  skins,  or  one-half  pound  a  skin. 
As  the  salt  was  thoroughly  shaken  off  these  skins,  the  accretion  of  water  from  dipping 
them  in  the  lagoon  may  be  represented  by  the  gain  in  weight. 

On  July  20  1  weighed  100  skins,  nearly  dry.  on  a  platform  scales  at  the  salt  house, 
finding  them  to  weigh  644}  pounds.  They  were  then  salted.  On  July  30  they  were 
hauled  out  of  salt  and  reweighed.  when  their  combined  weight  was  643}  pounds,  a 
loss  of  1  pound  on  100  skins.  These  may  be  taken  as  typical  to  show  the  effect  of 
salt  and  water  upon  skins.  I  was  not  able  to  experiment  with  perfectly  dry  skins 
after  the  date  mentioned,  but  I  believe  the  latter  will  show  a  slight  loss  of  Veight 
after  being  in  salt  for  a  period. 

Very  truly,  yours,  \V.  I.  LEMBKEY. 

Agent  in  Charge  Seal  Fisheries. 
Mr.  F.  K.  HITCHCOCK, 

( 'hief  Clerk.  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor. 

LerMcey  has  not  truthfully  stated  this  experiment:   He  made  the 
following  entry  himself,  in  the  official  journal  of  his  office  on  St.  Paul 
Island  and  did  not  water  those  skins,  then  {that  was  an  afterthought) 
•'S  not  shake  off  all  the  salt,  either.     (P.  149.) 

SATURDAY,    JULY   23,    1904. 

On  July  18,  107  skins  taken  on  Tolstoi  were  weighed  and  salted.  To-day  they 
were  hauled  out  of  the  kench  and  reweighed.  At  the  time  of  killing  they  weighed 
705  pounds,  and  on  being  taken  out  they  weighed  759£  pounds,  a  gain  in  salting  of 
54^  pounds,  or  one-half  pound  per  skin. 

Then,  Lemlkey  swears,  April  18,  1912,  that  he  has  never  weighed 
•x  nftc-r  salting. — (p.  446  Hearing  No.  9,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
Com.  &  Labor.) 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey,  you  say  you  have  never  weighed 
these  skins  after  you  have  salted  them?  You  have  never  weighed 
them  '. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  never  weighed  them  after  the  salting  on  the 
islands;  no,  sir. 

Lembkey's  trick  is  repeated  by  Marsh  and  Evermann,  8  years 
later.  (Hearing  Xo.  14;  pp.  974,  975;  July  29,  1912.) 

DR.  EVERMAXX.  Last  year,  when  Mr.  M.  C.  Marsh,  naturalist,  fur-seal  service,  went 
to  the  Pribilof  Islands,  he  was  instructed  to  make  certain  investigations,  one  of  which 
was  to  determine  by  actual  experiment  the  effect  that  salting  has  upon  the  weight  of 
fur-seal  ekins.  He  made  a  very  careful  investigation  of  the  matter,  and  his  report 

21588—13 8 


114  FUK-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

has  just  been  received.  It  is  so  interesting  and  valuable  that  I  wish  to  put  it  in  the 
record.  His  investigation  settles  the  question  conclusively  and  for  all  time.  It  shows 
that  salting  causes  fur-seal  skins  to  lose  weight.  The  report  is  as  follows: 

******* 

"  The  average  loss  of  weight  for  the  whole  60  skins  is  0.63  pound,  or  10  ounces.  This 
is  an  understatement  of  the  average  loss  of  weight,  which,  I  believe,  is  at  least  an  ounce 
greater.  The  reason  is  that  it  is  practically  impossible  to  mechanically  remove  all  the 
salt  from  the  skins  before  reweighing.  They  were  shaken,  swept,  and  brushed,  but  a  few 
grains  and  crystals  of  salt  were  always  left  adhering  to  each  side  of  the  skin.  Obviously 
it  would  not  do  to  wash  them  off.  By  more  carefully  cleaning  a  few  of  the  re- 
weighed  skins  and  then  again  weighing  them,  I  estimate  this  residual  salt  to  average 
an  ounce  or  something  more." 

Against  the  above,  observe  the  following  facts,  to  wit: 
In  the  village  salt  house,  St.  Paul  Island,  July  29,  1913,  400  fur- 
seal  skins  which  had  been  taken  July  7,  1913,  weighed  "green/1  and 
put  into  salt  there,  were  taken  out  of  the  kench,  salted,  and  bun- 
dled for  shipment,  and  then  weighed.  This  weighing  declared  the 
fact  that  the  salt-cured  skins  had  been  increased  over  their  "green" 
weights  all  the  way  from  a  minimum  of  one-half  pound  to  a  maxi- 
mum of  H  pounds  per  skin.  (See  table  of  400  skins;  pp.  102-105; 
Kept.  Spl.  Agents;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Commerce,  Aug.  31,  1913.) 

SELF-CONFESSED    OFFICIAL    DECEIT    IX    RE    YEARLING    SEALSKINS. 

To  show  that  Mr.  Lembkey  in  his  report  to  the  Secretary  of  Com- 
merce for  1904  was  deliberately  deceiving  the  department  as  to  the 
size  and  weight  of  yearling  sealskins,  the  following  deadly  parallel  on 
himself  is  drawn,  since  it  is  of  his  own  making. 

On  September  7,  1904,  Lembkey  says  in  his  official  report  (p.  77. 
Appendix  A) : 

On  July  1  there  were  3  yearling  seals  in  the  drives  at  Northeast  Point.  One  of  them, 
a  typical  specimen,  was  knocked  down  at  my  direction  to  ascertain  the  weight  of  the 
skin.  It  was  found  to  be  a  female.  The  carcass  before  sticking  weighed  34  pounds, 
and  the  skin  taken  off  hurriedly,  with  considerable  loose  blubber  adhering,  weighed 
4^  pounds.  The  removal  of  this  loose  blubber  left  the  skin  weighing  only  3|  pounds. 

While  no  further  effort  was  made  to  determine  the  weight  of  yearling  skins, 
this  instance  shows  that  the  skins  of  this  class  of  animals  are  far  below  the  limit  of 
weight  now  prescribed  by  the  department,  and  are  too  small  to  have  appeared  in 
the  company's  catch  at  any  time,  except  by  an  accident  in  clubbing. 

Then,  on  April  13,  1912,  to  the  House  committee,  he  testifies  that 
he  knows  that  yearling  sealskins  weigh  from  4  to  4f  pounds  (see  p. 
435,  Hearing  No.  9),  to  wit: 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  As  I  stated  to  the  committee,  T  knew  nothing  whatever  about  the 
measurements. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  do  you  know  anything  about  the  weights? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Because  I  have  taken  the  weights. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Oh,  you  have? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  taken  the  weights  on  the  island  of  all  sealskins  weighed  there 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  have?  I  want  to  call  your  attention  to  this,  and  the  attention  of 
the  committee.  You  say  you  have  taken  note  of  the  weights? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  testified  before  the  committee  that  every  skin  taken  on  the 
islands  except  a  few  that  inadvertently  were  omitted  were  weighed  there. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  is  the  weight  of  a  yearling  fur-seal  skin? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  weighed  very  few  yearling  skins,  but  they  would  usually  run  up 
to  4  or  4 f  pounds. 

On  April  13,  1912,  when  under  oath  before  the  House  Committee 
on  Expenses  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  Mr.  Lembkey 
testified  that  the  length  of  a  yearling  seal  of  his  own  identification 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


115 


and  measurement  was  39£  inches,  thus  (p.  442,  Hearing  No.  9,  House 
Committee  on  Expenses  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor; 
Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  639,  640,  May  2,  1912): 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  Do  you  know  that  Mr.  Fraser  states  that  the  process  of  dressing 
skins  instead  of  stretching  them  rather  shrinks  them? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No;  he  hasn't  said  so  anywhere.    Now,  Mr.  Lembkey  said,  on  page 

442,  that  he  had  measured  a  yearling  seal — three  of  them.    He  says  here  [reading]: 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  length  of  a  yearling  seal  on  the  animal  would  be  from  the  tip 

of  the  nose  to  the  root  of  the  tail,  39£  inches  in  one  instance  and  39£  inches 

in  another 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes. 

"Mr.  LKM;;KKY.  And  41  in  another.     I  measured  only  three. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.     Yes." 

Do  you  dispute  those  measurements? 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  I  do  not  dispute  them. 

Here  we  have  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  joining  in  with  Lembkey  in 
declaring  that  the  length  of  a  yearling  seal  is  39£  inches.  Now,  Mr. 
Lembkey,  on  page  443,  Hearing  No.  9,  tells  the  committee  that  the 
length  of  the  skin  of  this  yearling  seal  as  he  (Lembkey)  removes  it 
is  36^  inches  long,  thus: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  that  would  leave  a  yearling  skin  to  be  35  inches  long? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No;  if  it  was  39£  inches  long  it  would  leave  it  36£  inches.  That  is, 
all  of  the  animal,  from  the  tip  of  the  nose  to  the  root  of  the  tail,  would  be  39£  inches 
long.  Three  inches  off  that  would  leave  36^  inches. 

Now,  what  is  the  weight  cf  Mr.  Lembkey' s  yearling  skin  which  he 
has  taken  and  declared  to  be  36£  inches  long?  He  tells  the  depart- 
ment on  September  7,  1904,  in  a  carefully  prepared  report,  as  quoted 
above,  that  it  is  ''only  3J  pounds." 

Is  he  telling  the  truth  ?  Observe  the  following  part  of  list  of  400 
tagged  32-36-inch  long  skin  weights  which  he  made  himself  July  7, 
1913,  on  St.  Paul  Island,  and  affixing  the  tags  thereto  himself, 
declaring  those  weights  duly  registered  by  himself: 

Record  of  seals  taken  and  v:eights  recorded  of  skins,   July  7,  1913,  made  by   W.    J. 

Lembkey. 


Measurements 

(length)  of 
these  same 

Tagged  No.  of  skin. 

Green  weight 
of  skin. 

skins  (taken 
and  weighed 
by  Lembkev), 

made  July  29, 
1913,  by  Elliott 

and  Gallagher. 

Us. 

Ozs. 

Inches. 

4623 

5 

11£ 

32 

7 

ll| 

34 

4273  

6 

10" 

34 

4406          .        ..    . 

6 

H 

34 

4294 

8 

36 

424tj  

5 

15| 

31 

41'  44 

4 

31 

32 

4751 

g 

1 

32 

4275  

x 

?i 

32 

The  above  citation  of  a  few  of  the  400  tagged  and  weighed  skins 
which  are  all  given  in  extenso  by  the  agents  of  the  House  Committee 
on  Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce,  August  31,  1913, 
shows  that  Mr.  Lembkey  deliberately  deceived  the  department,  Sep- 
tember 7.  1904,  when  he  declared  that  he  "determined,  the  weight  of 
a  yearling  sealskin"  to  be  tl3J  pounds." 


116  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

That  these  measurements  are  reliable  when  made  "in  the  salt," 
Mr.  Lembkey  testifies  at  length  to  the  House  Committee  on  Expen- 
ditures in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor;  Hearing  No.  10; 
pages  399-340,  as  follows: 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  attempted  to  state  that  in  measuring  a  green  skin  it  is  im- 
possible to  find  out  its  exact  length  when  you  lay  it  on  the  ground,  because  it  may 
curl  up,  or  roll,  or  stretch,  and  it  can  only  be  measured  after  it  has  become  hardened 
by  salt. 

Mr.  McGiLLicuDDY.  Then  it  will  not  stretch? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Certainly  not. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  That  is  the  proper  time  to  measure  it,  after  it  lias  become  rigid 
and  stiff? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  You  can  not  then  stretch  or  shrink  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  With  an  honest  measurement  of  that  kind  of  .-kin.  would  it  not 
determine  the  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  fancy,  yes. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  Is  there  any  doubt  about  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  think  so.  I  say,  fancy,  because  I  never  attempted  to  judge 
of  age  by  the  measurements. 

Mr.  M'cGiLLicuDDY.  In  that  way,  if  anybody  wanted  to,  they  could  not  deceive. 
because  you  say  they  could  not  stretch  it? 

Mr.  LEMRJKEY.  You  could  not  stretch  it  after  it  had  been  salted  four  or  five  days, 
because  the  skin  then  is  not  very  pliable. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  Then  it  is  your  idea  that  me-.isiin'incnl  is  reliable  af,er  a  certain 
number  of  days? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes,  after  it  has  been  in  salt,  but  when  the  skin  is  ^re-'n  it  would 
not  be  a  reliable  test. 

Those  measurements  of  Mr.  Lembkey's  yearling  skins  (31-36J-inch 
skins),  as  taken  and  weighed  by  himself,  July  7,  1913,  were  made  in 
the  salt-house  kench  of  St.  Paul  Island,  in  the  presence  of  Messrs. 
Hatton,  Clark,  Whitney,  and  Lembkey,  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries, 
and  Messrs.  Elliott  and  Gallagher  for  the  House  Committee  on  Expen- 
ditures in  the  Department  of  Commerce;  they  were  all  agreed  upon 
as  correct  when  taken  and  recorded,  July  29,  1913,  by  the  gentlemen 
above  named. 

AN  EXHIBIT  OF  THE  COMMUNITY  OF  INTEREST  BETWEEN  THE  LES- 
SEES OF  THE  SEAL  ISLANDS  OF  ALASKA  AND  CERTAIN  OFFICIALS 
OF  THE  STATE  DEPARTMENT  AND  BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES,  1890-1905, 
IN  PROMOTING  A  FRAUDULENT  CLAIM  AT  THE  HAGUE,  .It  NE.  1902. 

THE  COMMUNITY  OF  INTEREST  EXISTING  BETWEEN  THE  SEAL  LESSEE.  LIKBKS.  AND  THIRD 
ASSISTANT  SECRETARY,  H.  H.  D.  PEIRCE.  UNITED  STATES  STATE  DEPARTMENT.  IN 
THE  BUSINESS  OF  PIRATICAL  PELAGIC  SEALING,  AS  COVERED  BY  THEIR  ASSOCIATION 
WITH  ALEXANDER  M'LEAN,  AND  HIS  EMPLOYMENT  BY  LIEBES.  CULMINATING  IN  1905. 

The  sworn  record  of  that  association  of  McLean  with  Liebes  begins 
in  1890,  as  follows.  He  was,  during  seasons  of— 

1890.  In  command  of  the  /.  Hamilton  Lems;  H.  Liebes,  owner;  raids  Copper  Island 
and  gets  off,  August  1.  with  two  men  badly  hurt. 

1891.  In  command  of  the  ./.  Hamilton  Lewis:  seized  August  2,  while  raiding  Copper 
Island  with  the  crew  of  the  E.  E.  Webster,  owned  by  H.  Liebes  and  commanded  by  his 
brother;  vessel  confiscated  and  he  is  imprisoned  at  "Vladivostok  a  few  weeks. 

1892.  In  command  of  the  Rosa  Sparks,  sealing  schooner  of  San  Francisco;  no  raids 
this  year. 

1893.  In  command  of  the  steam  sealer  Alexander,  flying  the  Hawaiian  flag;  he  is 
caught  by  the  U.  S.  S.  Mohican  raiding  Northeast  Point'  St.  Paul  Island,  in  July,  but 
escapes  in  the  fog  because  the  war  vessel's  engines  were  disabled. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  117 

The  Alexandtr  was  owned  by  Isaac  and  Herman  Liebes  up  to 
December  21,  1893.  In  November,  1893,  Liebes's  attorneys,  Jeffries 
and  Tingle,  filed  claims  against  Russia  for  damages  in  re  seizure  of  the 
Jams*  Hamilton  Lewis:  those  claims  were  put  up  to  the  United 
States  State  Department  in  the  name  of  a  " dummy"  owner  ("Max 
Waizman">  and  Alexander  McLean,  as  an  "American  citizen  law- 
fully engaged,"  etc.  McLean's  record  since  1893,  follows.  He  was 
during— 

Ix'.it   to   1!M>2.   Iii  command  of  various  pelage  v«"*sels.  but  under  re-traint  from  the 
:ce  the  claim  of  the  J.  Hamilt<>  -  being  prepared  and  pressed,  up  to 

-ful  end  November  29.  1902.  at  The  Hague. 

lit-  apt  •  true  American"  before  the  claims  award  commission  which 

Victoria    in  .settlement  of  damage  suits  airainst  the  United  States  Government 

-•alcr.<  and  vessels  i  ':  he  testifies,  "at  the  peril  of  his  life,"  for  the 

Am«'ri<  an  ;Hin;iii-si<mers  as  to  the  value  of  the  British  boats  seized.     (See  Kept.  2128, 

Senate  bill  3410.  oSth  <'ong..  2d  sess.i     He  is  in  truth  working  for  the  highest  figures 

:ible  from  the  United  States  Treasury,  instead  of  the  lowest. 

'•an  not  be  placed  with  certainty  this  year. 

I'.IM-I.  He  raids  Topper  Island  August  2.  in  the  ''Mexican"  schooner  Cervencitu:  one 
of  hi?  me!i  seriously  shot. 

l(.)fK>.  He  attempts  a  raid  on  St.  Paul  Island.  Northeast  Point,  but  is  driven  off.  he  is 
sailing  in  the  Acapulco,  and  defies  arrest  by  United  States  agents,  for  he  is  a  British 
subject:  at  Victoria  British  Columbia,  in  October.  1905. 

^  hy  did  McLean  defy  arrest  ?  Why  -was  he  undisturbed  at 
Victoria  ?  A'  hy.  when  he  had  been  indicted,  August  19,  1905,  in  the 
United  States  District  Court  of  California,  San  Francisco,  charged 
with  conspiracy  to  defraud  the  LTnited  States  Government,  under 
section  5440,  Revised  Statutes? 

It  was  because  the  United  States  State  Department,  when  asked 
(Sept.  16  and  Get  16,  1905)  by  the  United  States  consul  at  Victoria, 
Abraham  E.  Smith,  to  authorize  and  instruct  him  (Smith)  to  demand 
the  arrest  and  extradition  of  Alexander  McLean,  agreeably  to  the 
terms  of  that  above-cited  indictment  of  August  19,  1905,  refused 
to  so  ''instruct "  Consul  Smith.  The  United  States  district  attorney 
(Devlin),  of  the  California  District  Court,  had  also  asked  (Sept.  7, 1905) 
Consul  Smith  to  demand  the  arrest  and  extradition  of  McLean;  but 
Smith  replied  that  unless  the  State  Department  ordered  this  action 
on  his  part,  he  would  not  move  in  the  matter — that  he  could  not. 

But  Smith,  nevertheless,  did  address  a  request  in  September  (16th) 
to  H.  H.  D.  Peirce,  (as  Acting  Secretary  or)  Assistant  Secretary  of 
State,  for  authority  to  make  this  demand  on  the  British  authorities 
at  Victoria  for  McLean's  arrest  and  extradition.  Peirce  made  no 
answer.  On  October  16,  1905,  Smith  again  called  Peirce's  attention 
to  this  fact,  that  McLean  was  still  in  Victoria,  under  indictment  at 
San  Francisco,  but  "unless  specially  instructed  by  the  department 
to  demand  extradition,"  he,  Smith,  will  not  move  in  the  premises 
(despite  the  urgent  request  that  he  do  so,  as  made  by  United  States 
District  Attorney  Devlin,  of  California),  and  that  up  to  date  (Oct. 
16,  1905)  "no  such  instruction  has  been  received,  and,  therefore,  the 
whole  affair  appears  to  be  closed." 

Xow,  why  did  Peirce,  as  Acting  Secretary  of  State,  when  the 
United  States  consul,  Smith,  first  asked  him  to  authorize  this  demand 
for  McLean's  extradition  (September,  1905),  decline  to  do  so  and 
then  so  influence  the  Attorney  General's  office  in  Washington  as  to 
have  the  hint  given  Devlin  in  San  Francisco  that  McLean  could  not 
be  extradited,  "according  to  the  State  Department,"  for  this  offense, 


118  FUR-SEAL  HEED   OF   ALASKA. 

etc.;  that  he  (McLean)  "must  be  arrested  by  a  British  officer  of  the 
patrol  fleet,"  etc. « 

The  reason  is  found  in  the  report  of  the  House  Committee  on 
Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  No.  1425, 
Sixty-second  Congress,  third  session,  page  4,  to  wit: 

In  1893  proceedings  were  commenced  in  the  State  Department,  claiming  damages 
on  the  part  of  owners,  master,  and  crew  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis.  H.  H.  D. 
Peirce  and  Charles  H.  Townsend.  ''sealing  experts,"  of  the  United  States  Bureau  of 
Fisheries,  prepared  the  cases  for  the  parties  interested  and  presented  the  claim  on 
the  part  of  the  United  States  against  the  Russian  Government  at  The  Hague  in  1902, 
which  resulted  in  an  award  of  approximately  $50.000  in  favor  of  the  United  States 
Government  for  the  use  of  the  parties  interested,  including  Alexander  McLean  and 
Max  Weisman,  November  29,  1902.  The  said  H.  H.  D.  Peirce  and  Charles  H.  Town- 
send  presented  the  claim  of  Max  Weisman  as  the  owner  of  the  vessel  James  Hamilton 
Lewis  before  the  tribunal  at  The  Hague,  when  in  truth  and  in  fact  the  owner  of  said 
schooner  at  the  time  of  its  seizure  was  Herman  Lie-bos,  of  San  Francisco.  The  said 
H.  H.  D.  Peirce  and  Charles  H.  Townsend  represented  to  the  tribunal  in  the  trial  of 
said  case  that  Alexander  McLean,  the  captain  of  said  vessel,  was  an  American  citizen, 
when  in  truth  and  fact  he  was  a  British  subject  and  notoriously  known  as  a  pirate. 
(See  pp.  754,  755,  Hearing  No.  12.) 

In  Hearing  No.  13,  page  831,  June  20,  1912,  House  Committee  on 
Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  is  the 
following: 

STATEMENT    OF   ISAAC    LTEBES. 

The  witness  was  duly  sworn  by  the  chairman. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  your  full  name? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  Isaac  Liebes. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Where  do  yoa  live? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  In  San  Francisco. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  what  is  your  busii 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  am  a  merchant. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  kind  of  business  as  a  merchant  do  yo.i  conduct? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  Fur  business,  and  I  am  also  connected  with  the  salmon  business.  I 
am  vice  president  of  the  Northern  Navigation  Co..  Northern  Commercial  Co.,  director 
in  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.,  and  I  am  connected  with  9  or  10  other  cor- 
porations in  San  Francisco. 

The  men  indicted  August  19,  1905,  in  re  "Acapulco"  in  the  United 
States  District  Court  of  San  Francisco,  were  Alexander  McLean,  R. 
J.  Tyson,  S.  E.  R.  de  Saint,  W.  J.  Wood,  and  W.  J.  Woodside, 
charged  with  conspiracy  under  section  5440,  Revised  Statutes. 

In  Hearing  No.  4,  page  184,  July  11,  1911,  House  Committee  on 
Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  is  the 
following  sworn  record  of — 

THE    PROGRESSION    OF    CAPT.    ALEXANDER    M*LEAN    AS    AN    ''AMERICAN    CITIZEN." 

1890.  In  command  of  the    J.   Hamilton  Lewis;  H.    Liebes,   owner;  raids  Copper 
Island  and  gets  off,  August  1,  with  two  men  badly  hurl. 

1891.  In    command    of    the    /.   Hamilton   Lewis;  seized   August  2,   while  raiding 
Copper  Island  with  the  crew  of  the  E.  E.   Webster,  owned  by  H.  Liebes  and  com- 
manded by  his  brother;  vessel  confiscated  and  lie  is  imprisoned   at  Vladivostok  a 
few  weeks. 

1892.  In  command  of  the  Rosa  Sparks,  sealing  schooner-of  San  Francisco;  no  raids 
this  year. 

1893.  In  command  of  the  steam  sealer  Alexander,  flying  the  Hawaiian  flag;  he  is 
caught  by  the  U.  S.  S.  Mohican  raiding  Northeast  Point.  St.  Paul  Island,  in  July, 
but  escapes  in  the  fog  because  the  war  vessel's  engines  were  disabled. 

1894  to  1902.  In  command  of  various  pelagic  vessels,  but  under  restraint  from  the 
lessees,  since  the  claim  of  the  /.  Hamilton  Lewis  is  being  prepared  and  pressed,  up 
to  its  successful  end  November  29,  1902.  at  The  Hague. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  119 

i.  Ih-  appears  as  a  "True  American"  before  the  claims  award  commission, 
which  sits  at  Victoria,  in  settlement  of  damage  suits  against  the  Tnited  States  Gov- 
ernment for  seized  sealers  and  vessels  in  1S(56-1889;  he  testifies  "at  the  peril  of  his 
HiV."  ior  The  American  commissioners  as  to  the  value  of  the  British  boats  seized. 
iU-pT.  2128.  Senate  bill  3410.  58th  Cong..  2d  sess.)  He  is  in  truth  working  for 
the  highest  figures  obtainable  from  the  United  States  Treasury,  instead  of  the  lowest. 

He  ran  not  be  placed  with  certainty  this  year. 
1<M»4.   He  raids  Copper  Island  August  2."  in  the  "Mexican"  schooner  Cervencita; 

I  his  men  seriously  shot. 

!(«)">.   He  attempts  a  raid  on  St.  Paul  Island.  Northeast  Point,  but  is  driven  off; 
-ailing  in  the  Acnpulco.  and  defies  arrest  by  United  States  agents,  for  he  is  a 
Hritish  subject;  at  Victoria,  British  Columbia,  in  October,  1905. 

J906.  He  raids  St.  Paul  Island  July  16-17.  with  a  Japanese  outfit;  five  Japs  killed, 
and  12  prisoners  taken:  there  is  a  fleet  engaged  in  this  raid,  which  attacked  five 
ies  at  once  and  on  the  same  days;  they  got  away  from  all  of  them,  except  North- 
east Point,  with  seals  and  no  casualties. 

The  Alexander  was  owned  by  Herman  Liebes  up  to  December  30, 
1  ,V»1  :  then  transferred  to  "  II.  Liebes  &  Co.,"  and  owned  until  Decem- 
-7.  1893 :  then  transferred  to  Pacific  Trading  Co.,  in  which  Liebes 
was  a  director. 

Tiie  /:'.  E.  Webster,  owned  by  Herman  Liebes  up  to  October  21, 
1V»3:  then  transferred  as  "owned"  by  dummy  "Max  Waizman"  to 
the  Pacific  Trading  Co. 

The  Acapulco  was  outfitted  in  San  Francisco,  March  5,  1904.  and 
her  captain,  McLean,  was  indicted  for  conspiracy  there,  August  19, 
19D.5:  he  was  charged  with  '' equipping  and  furnishing  supplies"  for 
the  Acapulco  in  San  Francisco  Bay,  in  May,  1905. 

During  the  trial  of  McLean's  associates  in  the  southern  district  Cali- 
fornia court.  Capt.  Alexander  Woodside,  president  of  the  "Pacific 
Trading  Co.,"  was  unable  to  give  to  the  court  the  names  of  the  directors 
of  his  company.  "Ten  barrels  of  beef  had  been  supplied  to  the 
Acapulco  by  the  ''Pacific  Trading  Co.,"  and  the  court  wanted  to  find 
out  who  were  the  responsible  men  in  its  organization. 

In  re  Herman  and  Isaac  Liebes,  as  lessees,  buying  pelagic  sealskins : 
1890-1911. 

Who  was  the  Victorian  agent  of  the  Liebes,  after  Moss  "died"  in 
ISO. 

In  1892,  Morris  Moss,  of  Victoria,  B.  C.,  made  oath  that  he  was  the 
resident  agent  of  H.  Liebes  &  Co.  (of  San  Francisco)  and  that  he 
"  bought  from  ten  to  twenty  thousand  pelagic  fur  sealskins  annually" 
for  Lie5 

On  June  20,  1912,  Isaac  Liebes,  under  oath,  made  the  following  eva- 
sive and  shiiiv.  if  not  wholly  false,  answers  to  the  questions  as  Crated 
below  (Hearing  Xo.  13,  p.  881,  June  20,  1912,  House  Commiuee 
on  Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor): 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  Morris  Moss? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  did  know  him: 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Was  he  connected  with  your  firm  at  any  time? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  He  used  to  be  a  buyer  in  Victoria  at  one  time  for  H.  Liebe?  ct  <  o. — 1 
think  about  25  years  ago.  I  think  he  has  been  dead  twenty-odd  yea 

The  CHAIRMAN-.  Who  succeeded  him  for  you? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  He  never  had  a  successor  there. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Where  was  be  from? 

Mr.  LIEBES.   He  was  a  resident  of  Victoria:    I  do  not  know  where  from. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Then  he  bought  skins  for  you  at  Viet 

Mr.  LIEBES.  He  bought  all  kinds  of  skins  for  H.  Liebt.-  &  Co.,  mostly  land  furs, 
beaver,  mink,  otter,  and  those  things. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  sealskins,  t- 

Mr.  LIEBES.  He  might  have  done  so;  I  do  not  remember  any  sealskins,  but  possibly 
in  thw  early  days  he  might  have  bought  some. 


120  FUR-SEAL    HEED    OF   ALASKA. 

If  Liebes  tells  the  truth,  Moss  must  have  died  almost  imni. 
after  this  sworn  deposition  in  1892  was  made  by  him  as  above  cited 
and    quoted  in  volume  5,   Proceedings  Tribunal  Arbitration,    I 
pages  670,  671. 

Liebes  swears  that  Moss,  who  ''died"  in  1893,  had  no  successor  for 
his  place  as  the  "resident  agent  of  H.  Liebes  &  Co."  lie  ask-  die 
committee  to  believe  that  a  business  of  "buying  from  ten  to  t \vr.ty 
thousand  pelagic  fur  sealskins  annually"  from  the  hunters  at  Vic- 
toria, B.  C.,  was  abandoned  by  the  Liebes  when  Moss  died.  (Vol. 
2,  Proceedings  Tribunal  Arbitration,  1893,  p.  341;  see  Morris  ' 

deposition.) 


the  Hay-Elliot  treaty  went  into  effect,  December  15,  1911,  will  be 
found  a  matter  of  business  record  in  Victoria  when  a  competent 
search  for  it  is  made. 

H.  H.  D.  Peirce  under  oath  admits  that  lie  knew  that  the  Liebes 
were  the  owners  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis.  (Hearing  No.  13, 
pp.  779-782,  May  29,  1911,  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  the 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor.)  This  admission  is  made  by 
him,  to  wit: 

THE  COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND   LABOR, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Wednesday,  May  29, 
The  committee  this  day  met,  Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman)  presiding. 

STATEMENT    OF    MR.   H.   H.   I).  PEIRCE. 

The  witness  was  duly  sworn  by  the  chairman. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  your  full  name? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  Herbert  Henry  Davis  Peirce. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  your  profession? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  I  am  a  diplomat. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Well,  you  are  a  lawyer  by  pri-tY'ssiim? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  An  international  lawyer;  I  am  not  a  member  <A  the  bar. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  your  present  occupation? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  I  am  one  of  the  counsel  for  the  Government  in  the  American-British 
Claims  Arbitration. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  was  your  position  with  the  Government  some  years  ago? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  I  was  first  secretary  of  legation  at  St.  Petersburg,  and  after  it  becamp 
an  embassy,  secretary  of  embassy.  I  was  the  Third  Assistant  Secretary  of  State. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  may  tell  the  committee  what  the  real  issue  was  before  the  tri 
bunal  as  to  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  case. 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  The  Russian  Government  had  seized  the  James  Hamilton  Leiris  for 
poaching,  as  tley  call  it,  seals  on  the  Copper  Island.  The  James  Hamilton  Lewis 
arrested  outside  of  the  3-mile  limit.  She  was  on  I.er  way;  the  captain  alleged  that 
the  weather  was  thick,  and  that  he  had  proceeded  to  Copper  Island  in  order  to  get  hi> 
bearing— whether  that  is  true  or  not  I  do  not  know,  but  it  was  a  thing  disputed — am 
there  was  lying  off  around  the  southern  extremity  of  Copper  Island  a  Russian  cruiser 
which  the  master  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  could  not  see,  and  as  he  came  up  to  ware 
the  island  he  must  have  been  pretty  well  within  the  3-mile  limit,  for  if  be  saw  the 
vessel  he  certainly  could  have  seen  the  island:  the  cruiser  came  around  the  point,  anc 
then  McLean,  who  was  the  master  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  turned  tail  and  sailer 
away. 

The  cruiser  pursued  her  and  pursued  her  beyond  the  3-mile  limit  and  there  seizer 
her.  I  claimed  for  the  owners  and  officers  and  crew  that  her  presence  in  Russian 
waters  was  innocent,  that  there  was  no  corpus  delicti,  that  she  had  gone  tl  ere  for  a 
perfectly  reasonable  purpose,  and  was  merely  exercising  the  rights  that  any  vessel 
had,  and  that  her  pursuit  and  capture  beyond  the  3-mile" limit  was  a  violation  of  her 
right  to  sail  upon  any  sea. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  121 

T"  e  CHAIRMAN.   It  was  decided.  ti.en.  that  .si  e  was  not  in  Russian  \v;r 
Mr.  PEIRCE.  Tl  e  arbitrator  accepted  absolutely  my  argument. 

CHAIRMAN.    In  order  to  sustain  your  argument,  it  was  necessary  to  prove  that 
the  master  was  an  American  citizen  and  that  the  vessel  was  owned  by  American 

Mr.  PEIKCE.    \ 

''HAIKMAN.   \V  '-master? 

Mr.  !  )nc  Alexander  McLean. 

CHAIRMAN.  Can  you  tell  from  memory  whether  the  Russians  found  some  seal- 
skins aptured? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  My  recoll<M-ti-n  i<  t!  ey  did.  and  that  damages  were  awarded  for  the 
semir-  ins. 

'  HAIRMAN.   As  \v»>ll  as  for  the  property? 

Mr.  Pi  -IK-  as  t'-.r  the  property  and  the  loss  of  the  probable  catch. 

CHAIRMAN".   If  I  am  not  mistaken.  I  think  they  had  424  skins. 

Mr.  PKIKI  K.  T   a'  i-  my  iv  •••  Election.     I  am  somewhat  vague. 

CHAIRMAN'.  Yon  als  >  proved  to  t]  e  satisfaction  of  the  tribunal  that  the  vessel 
.vnod  by  American  citizen^'.' 

Mr.  PEIRI-E.  I  filed  su<  •"    documents  as  I  could  obtain,  which  appeared  to  establish 
asel. 

The  CHAIRMAN'.  Who  were  the  owners? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  H.  Liebes  &  Co.,  I  believe. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Who  were  they? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  I  can  only  answer  from  hearsay. 

The  CHAIRMAN-.  Just  in  a  general  way. 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  I  think  they  were  dealers  in  sealskins  or  promoters  of  pelagic  sealing, 
or  something  of  that  sort:  I  do  not  know. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  finally  settled.  You  may  tell  the  -committee  what  your  com- 
pensation was.  if  you  will? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  Certainly.  My  compensation  in  the  case  of  the  C.  H.  White,  and  I 
think  also  the  Kate  and  Anna  —  I  am  not  sure  of  that  —  no;  my  compensation  in  the 
case  of  the  C.  R.  Wliti.  for  which  I  recovered  an  award  of  $52,000.  was  $5.000,  less 
my  counsel  fees,  which  amounted  to  $1,000.  I  received  $4.000. 

The  CHAIRMAN-.  Did  anybody  else  receive  any  compensation? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  I  do  not  know."  I  presume  James  Embry  got  a  large  compensation. 
but  I  do  not  know. 

The  CHAIRMAN-.  Who  went  with  you  to  The  Hague  tribunal? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  Mr.  Townsend.     I  forget  his  initials. 

The  CHAIRMAN-.  Charles  Townsend. 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  He  had  been  employed,  I  think,  by  the  Treasury  Department  when 
the  care  of  the  seal  herd  was  under  the  Treasury  Department. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  He  was  sent  with  you  as  an  expert? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  As  an  expert. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  To  assist  you  in  presenting  the  case? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  Yes.  sir;  as  a  witness. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  he  receive  any  compensation? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  That  I  do  not  know.  He  received,  if  my  recollection  serves  me 
aright,  his  traveling  expenses,  which  I  think  I  paid  to  him.  to  be  refunded  out  of 
the  award. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  you  pay  him  any  money  out  of  your  fee? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  No.  sir."  i  Townsend.  Bureau  "of  Fisheries  "Expeit."  aids  Peirce, 
p.  7- 

ISAAC  LIEBES  FALSIFIES  ix  RE  OWNERSHIP,  AND  INTEREST  IN  THE 

BUSI\ES>     OF     PELAGIC     SEALING     AND    ITS    PRACTICAL    PROMOTION. 
AS    A    LESSEE   OF  THE    SEAL   ISLANDS.        1890-1903. 


Mr.  FAULKNER.  Mr.    Li^bcs.   will   you  siatc  To  the  committee  whether  you  were 

•  the  /.  Hamilton  /.• 
Mr.  LIEI  I       not  to  my  knowledge.     (I*.  S3;;.  Hearing  X«>.  1:5.  June  1*.  IfMi 

IXVE<TH;ATIMN-  OF  FUR-SEAL  INDUSTRY  OF  ALASKA. 


CHAIRMAN.  You  wen-  the  owner  at  one  tinu-  of  th*j  ./.  HcrniUo 
Mr   I.IEHES.  7  n-ax  not. 

Th»-  CHAIRMAN.  \\  as  it  not  transferred  to  you  by  Herman  hie; 
Mr.  I.iEisEs.   Xev«-r.  that  I  know. 


122  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  simply  wish  to  call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that  then-  is  :r 
certificate  from  The  custom' officers  to  the  effect  that  it  was  recorded  in  the  ivords  <>f 
the  Government  in  San  Francisco  that  you  were  the  owner  at  a  certain  date. 

Mr.  FAULKNER.  1  have  never  seen  it. 

Mr.  LIEBES.  If  you  will  let  me  see  it  I  will  be  glad. 

Mr.  FAULKNER/ I  have  never  been  able  to  see  that,  but  that  Herman  'Liebes  trans- 
ferred it  to  H.  Liebes  &  Co.  The  certificate  appears  on  page  120. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Herman  Liebes  and  H.  Liebes  &  Co.  (Inc.)     is  That  c 

Mr.  FAULKNER.  Yes.     There  is  a  declaration  on  page  204  showing  that 
Liebes  is  the  owner,  and  on  page  120  there  is  a  certificate  showing  that  he  tran.siVrred 
it  to  H.  Liebes  &  Co.  on  the  17th  day  of  September,  1890. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Yes;  that  is  right. 

Mr.  FAULKNER.  And  subsequently,  on  the  29th  day  of  July,  1891,  transferred  it  to 
Max  Waizman.  (P.  856,  Hearing  No.  1:5.  June  20.  1912.) 

PROOF,     SELF-CONFESSED,     BY    LIEBES,     THAT     HE     HAS    FALSIFIED,     AS 

ABOVE. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Here  is  a  document  purporting  to  he  signed  by  Max  Waizman  »n 
the  22d  day  of  December,  1902,  which  reads  as  follows:  (P.  860,  Hearing  Xo.  ]:',. 
June  20.  1912.) 

"Know  all  men  by  these  presents  that  /,  Max  Waizman,  for  value  received,  have 
sold  and  by  these  presents  do  grant,  assign,  and  convey  to  unto  Isaac  Liebes  all  my 
right,  title,  and  interest  in  and  to  my  claim  against  the  Russian  Government  for  the 
seisure  of  the  schooner  James  Hamilton  Lewis  by  the  Russian  man-of-war  Afo/t,  on 
August  2,  1891,  whilst  20  miles  off  Copper  Islands,  en  route  to  San  Francisco,  r  gether 
with  her  apparel,  equipment,  boats,  guns,  stores,  provisions,  and  426  sealskins,  and 
for  breaking  up  the  season's  cruise,  the  same  unto  the  said  Isaac  Lie-bes.  hereby 
constituting  and  appointing  said  Isaac  Liebes,  my  true  and  lawful  attorney,  irrevoca- 
ble in  my  name,  place,  and  stead,  for  the  purpose  aforesaid,  to  ask.  demand,  sue  for. 
attach,  levy,  recover,  and  receive  all  such  sum  and  sums  of  money  which  now  are  or 
may  hereafter  become  due,  owing  and  payable  for  or  on  account  of  all  or  any  of  the 
accounts,  dues,  debts,  and  demands  above  assigned;  giving  and  granting  unto  the 
said  attorney  full  power  and  necessary,  as  fully,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  as  1 
might  or  could  do,  if  personally  present,  with  full  power  of  substitution  and  revocation, 
hereby  ratifying  and  confirming  all  that  the  said  attorney  or  his  substitute  shall 
lawfully  do  or  cause  to  be  done  by  virtue  hereof. 

"  In  witness  whereof.  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand  and  sea!  the  22d  day  of  Decem- 
ber, 1902. 

"  MAX  WAIZMAN. 

"Witness — 

"BEN.  A.  GOLDSMITH." 

This  was  an  assignment  to  you  of  all  his  right,  title,  and  interest  in  the  claim  which 
he  had  against  the  Russian  Government. 

Mr.  FAULKNER.  I  do  not  understand  it  in  that  way.  I  understand  that  is  an  assign- 
ment to  H.  Liebes  &  Co.,  with  power  of  attorney  to  Isaac  Liebes  to  collect  this  money. 

The  CHAIRMAN.   No;  it  says; 

Have  sold  and  by  these  presents  do  grant,  assign,  and  convey  unto  Isaac  Licbf*  all  my 
right,  title,  and  interest  in  and  to  my  claim  against  the  Russian  Government  for  the 
seizure  of  the  schooner  James  Hamilton  Lewis. 

Mr.  FAULKNER,  Oh,  I  understood  it  to  be  to  H.  Liebes  &  Co. 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  thought  your  question  was  whether  he  did  not  transfer  the  vessel 
to  me. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  this  a  correct  statement  of  what  took  place? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  have  no  recollection  of  the  document,  but  if  any  signature  is  on 
there  it  must  be  so. 

PEIRCE     SWEARS     THAT     TINGLE     TOLD     HIM     THAT     LIEBES     WAS     THE 
OWNER,    AND    PRODUCES    THE    PROOF    OF    IT. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  you  have  all  the  affidavits  and  papers  on  me  which  were  nec- 
essary to  make  out  a  case?  I  mean  copies  of  the  papers. 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  To  make  out  the  case  against  the  Russian  Government,  certainly. 
They  are  all  published  in  Appendix  1  of  Foreign  Relations  for  1902.  They  are  all 
published  in  English.  The  original  preparation  of  the  case  was  in  French.  It  is 
quite  a  volume  and  required  a  good  deal  of  French  writing. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  123 

The  CHAIRMAN'.  The  Liebes  were  interested  in  all  the  vessels — were  they  not? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  I  have  no  knowledge  of  that,  except  by  hearsay.  After  the  proceedinns 
at  The  Hague,  Geo.  R.  Tingle  told  me  that  they  were,  as  I  remember  it,  that  they  prac- 
tically owned  most  of  the  pelagic  sealing  vessels.  That  is  the  impression  I  not  from 
him  in  some  way.  I  cannot  be  sure,  however. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  In  other  words,  they  practically  controlled  the  pelagic  sealing  and 
they  were  members  of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  I  did  not  know  any  of  that  of  my  own  knowledge.  I  simply  heard  it 
after  the  argument  at  The  Hague  from  Tingle.  I  have  this  morning  seen  a  letter 
which  I  wrote  to  my  counsel,  and  in  which  I  said  that  Tinnle  had  informed  me  that  the 
sale  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  to  Waizman  was  a  mere  cloak  and  that  it  was  not  bona 
fide  sale.  Whether  that  is  true  or  not,  I  can  not  say. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  certainly  thought  it  was  true  or  you  would  not  have  written 
it?  (P.  784.  Hearing  Xo.  12.  June  4,  1912. 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  I  certainly  thought  it  v:as  true  at  the  Zirae,  and  I  think  it  probably  was. 
I  simply  quoted  Mr.  Tingle  as  having  suggested  that:  I  did  not  vouch  for  it.  (P.  785, 
Hearing  Xo.  12.  June  4/1912.) 

The  CHAIRMAN'.  I  understand  that  there  is  an  affidavit  on  file,  a  copy  of  which  i& 
before  me,  an  affidavit  which  it  was  necessary  for  you  to  use  in  order  to  substantiate 
the  claim  of  the  United  States  before  The  Hague  tribunal.  I  will  read  the  affidavit 
and  will  let  you  make  such  statement  in  connection  thereto  as  you  may  desire. 
(P.  785.) 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  Xo;  I  have  never  seen  that  affidavit,  so  far  as  I  can  remember,  or 
heard  of  it.  I  am  very  sure  that  it  was  not  used  in  that  proceeding.  I  speak,  of 
course,  from  memory.  'There  were  a  great  many  documents  filed  in  the  arbitration, 
but  I  have  no  recollection  of  that  and  I  do  not  think  it  was  filed.  You  will  be  pleased 
to  observe,  sir,  that  that  is  Isaac  Liebes.  The  owners  were  Herman  Liebes  &  Co. 

The  CHAIRMAN'.  But  it  was  transferred  by  a  bill  of  sale  and  Isaac  Liebes  is  the  man 
who  turned  up  to  get  all  the  money  so  that  there  would  not  be  any  left  for  you. 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  I  brought  an  injunction  against  Patton  and  Embry.  Xow  that  you 
speak  of  it.  I  belie  re  Liebes  did  turn  up  in  connection  with  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis, 
but  I  brought  no  injunction  against  him,  I  think.  I  think  we  settled  it  by  agreement 
because  Tingle  had  filed  an  agreement  with  Liebes  to  pay  him  25  per  cent  of  the  award  and, 
as  I  remember,  the  department  paid  him  that  25  per  cent,  he  paying  me  the  10  per  cent. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  He  even  had  a  power  of  attorney  from  Max  Waizman? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  Yes.  sir:  and  I  presume  Patton  in  that  connection  said  to  me  some- 
thing about  the  sale  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  to  Max  Waizman.  (P.  786.) 

ISAAC   LIEBES   IDENTIFIES  TINGLE   AS   THE   EMPLOYEE   OF  THE   LESSEES 
FROM    MARCH    12,     1890,    TILL    HIS    DEATH    IN    1906. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Who  was  George  R.  Tingle? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  He  was  employed  by  the  Xorth  American  Commercial  Co. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  he  living  or  dead? 

Mr.  LIEBES.   I  believe  he  is  dead.1 

The  CHAIRMAN.  When  did  he  enter  the  employ  of  the  Xorth  American  Commer- 
cial < 

Mr.  LIEBES.  shortly  after  the  lease.2 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  he  became  what?     What  did  he  do  for  the  company? 

Mr.  LIEBE.S.  I  believe  he  was  the  company's  representative  on  the  seal  islands. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Was  he  the  general  superintendent,  or  what  was  his  title? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  really  do  not  remember  what  his  title  was. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  he  continue  during  the  whole  period  of  the  lease,  or  not? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  X<>.  sir;  he  died  some  time  afterwards. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  How  long  afterwards? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  really  could  not  tell  you. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Was  he  living  in  1902,  or  not? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  can  not  tell  you.     (P.  846,  Hearing  Xo.  13,  June  20.  I!Hi'. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Mr.  Liebes,  it  appeared  that  he  filed  some  papers  as  attorney  in 
the  /.  Hamilton  Lewis  matter. 

Mr.  LIEBES.  Well,  if  you  will  let  me  see  those  papers,  I  will  refresh  my  memory. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  not  remember  that  George  R.  Tingle  did  file  some  papers 
in  the  James  Hamilton  Levns  case  and  signed  them  as  attorney  for  the  claimants? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  saw  it  in  the  record  as  I  read  it. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  in  the  record. 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  have  read  it  in  the  record. 

i  Tingle  died  in  1906.  «  Lease  given  him  Mar.  12, 1890. 


124  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Mr.  Elliott,  do  you  know  on  what  date  those  papers  were  filed? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  They  were  first  filed  in  1893. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  understand  that  the  Tingle  papers  were  filed  in  1893.  At  that 
time  Tingle  was  in  the  employ  of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.,  was  he  not? 
(Tingle  employed  1890  to  1906.  For  16  years.) 

Mr.  LIEBES.  Yes,  sir;  I  believe  so.  I  am  not  certain  about  that,  but  that  is  my  impres- 
sion. 

PEIRCE    IDENTIFIES    TINGLE    AS     LIEBEs's    AGENT,    PAYING     HIM,    ETC. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  did  you  receive  from  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  case? 

Mr.  PEIRCE.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  received  the  same  amount,  or  a  little 
less,  from  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  case.  I  think  I  received  10  /></•  mil.  Mr.  Tingle 
'told  me  that  he  was  entitled  to  25  per  cent,  and  that  if  he  paid  me  10  per  cent,  then  he  would 
pay  somebody  5  per  cent  or  2^  per  cent,  and  that  would  equalize  if.  (P.  785,  Hearing  No. 

LIEBES   TRIES   TO    DENY   THAT    ORDER    OF     PAYMENT     BY    INDIRECTION'. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Mr.  Peirce  stated  to  the  committee  that  he  was  employed  by 
George  R.  Tingle,  who  was  the  attorney  who  filed  the  paper.-;. 

Mr.  FAULKNER.  Attorney  in  fact. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  In  any  capacity  that  you  may  choose  to  call  it.  Was  George  R. 
Tingle  attorney  in  fact? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  could  not  tell  you,  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  He  was  then  still  in  the  employ  of  the  North  American  Commer- 
cial Co.,  was  he  not? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  What  year  do  you  mean? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  When  these  papers  were  filed;  I  think  it  was  in  1893. 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  believe  he  was  employed  in  1893;  I  am  not  positive,  but  I  think  so. 
•(P.  858,  Hearing  No.  12.) 

THE  RECORD  DECLARES  THE  FACT  THAT  LIEBES  WAS  THE  '' OWNER," 
1890-1902;  AND  PAID  TINGLE,  PEIRCE,  AND  TOWNSEND  FOR  SERV- 
ICES, MARCH,  1903,  AFTER  THEY  SECURED  THE  MONEY NOVEM- 
BER 29,  1902. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  filed  a  bond  and  drew  the  money  after  paying  Peirce,  Town- 
send,  and  Tingle,  and  there  is  a  statement  at  which  you  may  look/ 

Mr.  LIEBES.    Yes,  sir;  I  see  that. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  In  this  connection  I  think  we  might  as  well  let  this  memorandum 
become  a  part  of  the  record.  (P.  861,  Hearing  No.  13.) 

Said  memorandum  follows: 

RUSSIAN    SEALING    CLAIMS. 

Claim  of  the  owner  and  crew  of  the  schooner  James  Hamilton  Leu-is  against  Russia. 

Amount  received  from  Russia  in  settlement  of  the  award  made  by  the  arbi- 
trator, under  convention  of  Aug.  26.  1900 * . $47,  684.  78 

Deducted  by  Department  of  State  as  reimbursement  of  the  pro  rata  share 
of  expenses  incurred  in  arbitration 1,  001.  56 


Available  for  distribution  to  claimants 46.  683.  22 

Distribution  made  as  follows: 

Herbert  H.  H.  D.  Peirce  and  George  R.  Tingle,  for  attor- 
neys' fees,  by  direction  of  the  schooner  and  attorney  for 
crew " S13,  949.  00 

Isaac  Liebes,  assignee  of  the  owner,  and  assignee  and  attor- 
ney for  members  of  crew,  under  bond  filed  with  the  de- 
partment    32,  547.  65 

C.  H.  Town  send,  pro  rata  share  of  $410  paid  to  him  for 
services  as  a  sealing  expert  in  giving  expert  testimony  before 
arbitrator .' 186.  57 


46,  683.  22 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA.  125 

The  above  amounts  were  paid  to  parties  named  by  certificate  of  the  Secretary  of 
State  on  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  as  per  form  herewith,  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  the  act  of  February  26,  1896. 

Bureau  of  Accounts.  May  28,  *1912.  W.  AF. 

LIEBES    KNOWINGLY    VIOLATES    HIS    CONTRACT    IN    RE    OWNERSHIP    OP 
SAID  "  JAMES  HAMILTON    LEWIS." 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that,  when  you  signed  the  lease  and  gave  bonds  for 
its  faithful  observance.  March  12,  1890,  a  pelagic  hunting  schooner,  owned  by  your 
fellow  lessee.  Herman  Liebes.  was  then  at  work  hunting  for  seals  at  sea? 

Mr.  LIEBES.   /  had  no  J:  no  u.  ledge  of  it. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  say  you  have  no  knowledge  of  it? 

Mr.  LIEBES.   I  say  if  such  was  the  case,  I  had  no  knowledge  of  it.. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  the  ownership  of 
which  was  vested  in  Herman  Liebes,  had  cleared,  on  or  before  March,  1890,  from  San 
Francisco,  bound  for  hunting  fur  sea's  at  sea? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  hare  no  recollection  of  that  at  all.  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I.c  it  not  a  fact  that  at  the  close  of  the  season  of  1890  the  aforesaid 
Jinnix  H<!  mil  ton  l.»  /'  >s  had  taken  some  1,471  fur-seal  skins  at  sea,  or  more  of  them? 

Mr.  LIEBES.   1  lave  no  knou:ledy?  of  it. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  mean  to  say.  Mr.  Liebes.  chat  they  did  or  did  not,  or  that 
you  don't  know  anything  about  it? 

Mr.  I.JEBES.   I  floiCt  knoii.  a  nothing  about  it. 

CHAIRMAN.   Is  it  not  a  fact  That  on  or  about  August  ] .  1890,  the  James  Hamilton. 
rallied  the  fur-seal  rookeries  on  Copper  Is  and  (C<  mmander  or  Russian  Is  ands), 
\sas  fired  on.  two  men  badly  wounded,  but  managed  to  escape  capture?     (P.  887.) 

M-.  LIEBES.   I  hart  no  knowledge  of  that. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  on  September  17.  1890,  you.  Isaac  Liebes.  presi-- 
dent  of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co. ,  became  a  part  owner  of  the  James  Hamil- 
ton L> 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  don't  knou:  anything  about  it.     (P.  £P6.  Hearing  No.  13.) 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  you  know  when  you  read  the  Windom  lease  that  he  had  bound 
you  in  its  terms  not  to  engage  in  pelagic  sealing,  on  the  pain  of  penalties  and  the  for- 
feiture of  your  lease  and  bonds  if  you  did? 
j    Mr.  LIEBES.  I  hare  never  seen  such  a  lease  that  Iknoic  of. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  Secretary  Windom  modify  or  change  his  draft  of  the  new  lease 
of  Mav  1.  1890-Mav  1,  1910,  in  the  least  when  vou  accepted  and  signed  it  March  12, 
1890?' 

Mr.  LIEBES.  That  is  a  matter  that  I  do  not  know  anything  about.  (P.  887,  Hearing 
Xo.  1.-;.  June  20,  1912.  i 

The  (  'HAIRMAN.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  when  you  signed  the  lease  and  gave  bonds  for  its 
faithful  obs-rvanre.  March  12.  1890.  a  pelagic  hunting  schooner,  owned  by  your  fellow 
lessee,  Herman  Liebes.  was  then  at  work  hunting  for  seals  at  sea? 

Mr.  LIEBES.   I  had  no  knowledge  of  it. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  say  you  hive  no  knowledge  of  it? 

Mr.  LIEBES.   I  -uy  it"  -nieh  was  tliri  case.  I  had  no  knowledge  of  it. 

The  CHAIRMAN,  'is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  the  ownership  of 
which  was  vested  in  Herman  Liebes.  had  cleared,  on  or  before  March,  1890,  from  San 
Francisco,  bound  for  hunting  fur  seals  at  sea? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  have  no  recollection  of  that  at  all,  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  at  the  close  of  the  season  of  1890  the  aforesaid 
Hamilton  Lt  iris  had  taken  some  1,471  fur-seal  skins  at  sea.  or  more  of  them? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  have  no  knowledge  of  it. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  mean  to  say,  Mr.  Liebes.  that  they  did  or  did  not,  or  that 
you  don't  know  anything  about  it? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  don't  know  anything  about  it.     (P.  887,  Hearing  No.  13,  June  20t 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  on  or  about  August  1. 1890,  the  James  Hamilton 
raided  the  fur-seal  rookeries  on  Copper  Island  (Commander  or  Russian  Islands), 
was  fired  on,  two  men  badly  wounded,  but  managed  to  escape  capture? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  have  no  knowledge  of  that. 

The  (  'HAIRMAN.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  on  September  17.  1890,  you,  Isaac  Liebes.  presi- 
dent of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.,  became  a  part  owner  of  the  James  Ham- 
ilton Lewis? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  don't  know  anything  about  it. 


126  FUK-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

The  CHAIRMAN'.  Is  it  not  true  that  Isaac  and  Herman  Liebes  held  this  ownership  of 
the  said  James  Hamilton  Lewis  between  them  until  July  29,  1891? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  have  no  personal  knowledge  of  that. 

Mr.  FAULKNER.  Mr.  Chairman.  I  think  he  ought  to  be  allowed  to  say.  too.  that  the 
records  show  here  that  it  was  assigned  in  September.  1900. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Yes;  I  think  he  has  said  that.  Will  you  repeat  what  the  considera- 
tion was  when  Max  Waisman  transferred  the  interests  that  he  had  in  the  James  Ham- 
ilton Lewis  to  you?  I  asked  you  that  this  morning.  1  believe. 

Mr.  LIEBES.  Whatever  the  document  calls  for. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Mr.  Liebes  filed  an  affidavit  with  the  Secretary  at  the  time  of  the 
•execution  of  the  lease  that  he  was  not  knowingly  engaged  in — 

Mr.  ELLIOTT  (interposing).  Pelagic  sealing  of  any  kind  whatever;  that  was  the  dis- 
tinct impression  he  gave  to  Mr.  Windom. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  how  many  pchigi<'  sealskins  were  taken  by  the 
James  Hamilton  Lewis  in  1890? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  only  know  from  the  sworn  depositions  of  one  of  her  hunters,  George 
Wester,  filed  with  the  tribunal,  2,625  skins.  (See  S.  Doc.  177,  pt.  8,  pp.  712-714,  53d 
Cons?.,  2d  sess.) 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  have  a  letter  which  I  received  in  behalf  of  the  committee  stating 
that  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  ended  a  trip  September  11, 1890,  and  had  1 ,464  sealskins, 
and  the  collector  of  the  port  of  San  Francisco  questions  the  2,625  skins  as  I  had  sug- 
gested in  my  letter  to  him.  Can  you  explain  the  difference  between  those  two  sets  of 
figures? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  deponent.  Wester,  who  swears  that  those  skins  were  taken,  ex- 
plains it  in  his  affidavit.  He  says  they  were  taken  in  the  spring  catch;  before  they 
went  over  to  the  Russian  side  they  had  eleven  hundred  and  odd  skins,  which  makes 
the  2,625  skins.  The  fourteen  hundred  and  odd  skins  that  came  down  to  San  Fran- 
cisco September  11.  1890.  came  direct  from  the  Russian  islands. 

The  CHAIRMANT.  And  in  1890  the  Liebes  were  the  owners  of  the  James  Hamilton 
Lewis. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes;  and  so  certified  to  The  Hague  by  Peirce  and  Townsend.  who  did 
not  deny  it  there.  (P.  962.  Hearing  No.  14.  July  :U).'  1(>12. ) 

WASHINGTON,  D.,  C.,  February  16,  1901. 
Hon.  HERBERT  H.  D.  PEIRCE, 

St.  Petersburg. 

MY  DEAR  Mr.  PEIRCE:  Yours  of  18th  January  came  duly  to  hand.  I  can  well 
imagine  how  you  feel  toward  my  clients  in  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  case;  indeed, 
I  had  quite  a  spat  with  them  in  San  Francisco  on  the  question  of  advancing  you  $500 
on  account  of  valuable  services  rendered,  and  made  it  clear  to  them  they  could  not 
escape  payment  to  you  in  the  event  of  the  arbitrators  awards  being  unfavorable.  I  wish 
you  render  me  a  bill  for  money  paid  out  in  their  behalf,  that  I  may  have  it  in 
hand  as  the  opportunity  may  be  presented  for  me  to  meet  them  before  the  conclusion 
of  the  case;  if  so,  I  will  make  another  effort  to  secure  a  payment  to  you. 

I  feel  myself  it  is  a  long  dry  spell.  Surely  the  end  is  near  at  hand  when  we  will 
get  our  pay  with  heavy  interest  to  make  up  for  the  very  shabby  treatment  you  have 
received.  Whatever  award  is  made  and  paid  will  come  through  the  State  Depart- 
ment and  by  them  paid  to  me  as  attorney  of  record,  thus  giving  me  the  control  of  its 
distribution  at  this  end  of  the  line,  which  insures  your  fee  and  my  own. 

I  thank  you  for  the  two  copies  of  your  presentation  of  the  case,  which  by  an  oversight 
of  the  department  were  sent  to  Ed  at  Philadelphia.  In  a  letter  from  him  received 
to-day  he  informed  me  he  had  them  and  after  reading  would  send  to  me.  He  said 
your  work  stands  out  very  prominently  in  the  able  brief  you  submitted.  He,  with 
myself,  feels  quite  indignant  at  my  client's  refusal  of  my  request;  rely  on  my  squaring 
the  goods  satisfactorily  when  I  get  the  check  in  my  own  hands.  I  thank  you  for 
your  kind  expressions  to  me  personally,  and  hope  to  wind  up  this  long  drawn-out  case 
to  our  mutual  interests,  the  sooner  the  better,  that  we  may  have  the  benefit  of  our 
share. 

As  soon  as  you  can  give  me  an  idea  of  the  probable  date  of  a  decision,  for  my  own 
information  only,  I  would  be  glad  to  have  it.     Wishing  you  the  greatest  success. 
I  am,  sincerely  yours, 

GEO.  R.  TING] 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  127 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C..  July  ^.5,  1901. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  PEIRCE  :  Your  esteemed  favor  of  6th  instant  was  duly  received,  incloa- 
ing  copy  of  your  rejoinder,  which  leaves  nothing  to  add;  it  is  complete .  I  at  once 
called  at  the  department.  Judge  Pennfield  agreed  to  order  the  printing  done,  so  that, 
as  you  say.  closes  our  case. 

I  do  hope  no  delay  without  the  very  best  reasons  will  prevent  the  early  considera- 
tion of  the  case  by  the  arbitrator,  so  that  his  conclusion  may  be  reached  within 
the  time. 

The  weather  here  is  extremely  oppressive;  heat  intense. 

I  congratulate  you  on  the  practical  conclusion  of  your  great  labors  in  the,  Russian 
nd  hope  for  a  substantial  award  as  the  result. 
Yours,  truly,  GEO.  R.  TINGLE. 


DEPARTMENT  OF  STATE, 
OFFICE  OF  THIRD  ASSISTANT  SECRETARY. 

Washington,  February  27 ,  I'.t- 

MY  DEAR  JUDGE  COLE:  I  inclose  herewith  copies  of  papers  authorizing  me  to  act 
as  counsel  for  the  owners,  officers,  and  crew  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  and  the  Cape 
Horn  Pigeon.  My  employment  in  the  case  of  the  C.  H.  White  was  similarly  author- 
ized, verbally.  I  also  inclose  dispatch  to  United  States  Ambassador  at  St.  Peters- 
burg, informing  him  that  I  had  been  appointed  counsel  for  the  Government,  without 
compensation  from  the  Government  for  my  services. 

I  also  send  a  copy  of  a  letter  received  to-day  by  Mr.  Tingle  in  answer  to  his  letter 
to  Herman  Ganss,  which  I  had  supposed  to  be*  in  reply  to  his  letter  to  him  asking  for 
copies  of  papers  which  he  was  to  file  here,  in  the  James  Hamilton  Leu-is  case.  He  has 
not  sent  the  copies.  I  have  advised  Mr.  Tingle  to  file  his  papers  making  claim  for 
25  per  cent.  I  forgot  to  ask  you  whether  you  had  looked  up  the  question,  to  see  whether 
you  could  find  a  citation  giving  a  precedent  for  the  Secretary  of  State  to  hold  up  25 
per  cent  on  the  basis  of  Mr.  Tingle's  contract  with  these  people. 
Yours,  very  truly, 

HERBERT  H.  D.  PEIRCE. 
Judge  CHARLES  C.  COLE, 

Century  Building,  Washington,  D.  C. 


genesis  of  Senate  bill  3410,  which  was  introduced  to  legalize 
and  take  to  the  United  States  Court  of  Claims  the  demands  of  57 
pelagic  sealing  vessels,  owners,  masters,  and  crews  thereof,  for  dam- 

This  bill  was  promoted  chiefly  by  the  Liebes's  interests  in 
Washington,  D.  C.,  with  Don  M.  Dickinson  as  4< chief  attorney  for 
claimants."  Behind  him  were  ex-Senator  C.  J.  Faulkner  and  H.  H.  D. 
Peirce  et  ?il. 

THE  BRIEFF.D  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THIS  BUSINESS,  BEGINNING  WITH  THE 
AWARD  OF  THE  BERING  SEA  TRIBUNAL,  AUGUST  16,  1893,  AND 
ENDING  WITH  THE  DEFEAT  OF  SENATE  BILL  3410,  JANUARY  20, 

1905. 

Auf/usf  16,  1893.— Award  of  Bering  Sea' Tribunal,  Article  VIII, 
provides  for  settlement  of  claims  of  British  sealing  vessels  seized  by 
the  I  iiited  States  in  the  "open  waters  of  Bering  Sea/' seasons  of 

•'J-87-89,  inclusive,  etc. 

FfJjrvanj  8,  1896. — Convention  agreed  upon  between  Great  Britain 
and  the  I  nited  States  to  settle  said  claims  as  designated  in  Article 
YIII  of  the  award  of  the  Bering  Sea  Tribunal.  Victoria,  B.  C.,  is  the 
appointed  place  for  assembling  the  commission,  and  July,  1896,  the 
time  of  meeting.  There  are  1 1  British  vessels  named  as  legal  claim- 
ants. Don  M.  Dickinson  is  appointed  senior  counsel  for  the  United 
States. 


128  FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 

December  17,  1897. — An  award  is  made  by  the  Victoria  arbitrators 
of  $414,000  damages  for  the  British  claimants. 

February  26,  1902. — A  convention  (stimulated  by  Liebes  and 
Elkins)  is  agreed  upon  between  Russia  and  the  Lnited  States  to  settle 
the  claims  of  Liebes's  vessel,  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  and  three  other 
American  vessels  seized  by  the  Russian  Government  in  the  Okhotsk 
arid  Bering  Seas  during  1889-91.  The  Hague  is  named  as  place  of 
convention  meeting,  and  June  14,  1902,  as  date  of  said  meeting. 
H.  H.  D.  Peirce  and  C.  H.  Townsend  are  appointed  as  delegates  of 
the  I  nited  States  to  present  and  prosecute  the  claims  of  Liebes  et  al. 
before  the  arbitrator. 

November  29,  1902. — An  award  of  $28,588  is  given  to  the  claim- 
ants in  re  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  with  "interest  on  that  sum  at  6  per 
cent  per  annum  from  1st  January,  1892,  until  the  day  of  full  payment. " 
To  the  Kate  and  Anna,  $1,488  in  United  States  money,  with  "interest 
on  that  sum  at  6  per  cent  per  annum  until  the  day  of  full  payment.'7 
To  the  a  H.  White,  the  sum  of  $32,444  in  United  States  money 
with  "interest  on  that  sum  of  6  per  cent  per  annum,  from  1st  of 
January,  1893,  to  the  time  of  full  payment."  To  the  Cape  Horn  Pigeon 
(whaling  bark)  the  "sum  of  $38,750  in  United  States  money  with 
interest  on  that  sum  at  6  per  cent  per  annum  from  the  9th  of  Sep- 
tember, 1892,  until  the  day  of  payment  in  full." 

March  22,  1903. — Liebes,  Tingle,  Peirce,  and  Townsend  divide 
that  James  Hamilton  Lewis  award  as  made,  on  this  day,  total  sum 
of  $46,682,  between  them. 

December  19,  1904- — The  success  of  these  claimants  at  The  Hague 
stimulated  Liebes  and  his  associates  in  the  pelagic  sealing  industry 
to  prepare  and  have  introduced  Senate  bill  3410;  they  secured  a 
favorable  and  unanimous  approval  by  the  Foreign  Relations  Com- 
mittee of  a  report  (No.  2128)  on  April  13, 1904  (written  by  their  attor- 
neys, Don  M.  Dickinson  et  al.).  This  bill  carries  the  names  of  57 
dealing  vessels,  in  which  the  entire  list  of  Liebes's  fleet  appears,  in 
eluding  that  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis. 

January  6-20,  1905. — Senate  bill  3410  is  defeated  after  a  series  of 
heated  debates  running  through  four  daily  sessions  of  the  Senate, 
viz,  January  6,  10,  19,  and  20.  Senators  Platt  (Connecticut)  and 
Dolliver  fight  it.  Senators  Foraker,  Fulton,  Lodge,  in  chief,  defend 
it,  but  can  not  secure  its  passage. 

NOTE. — The  sealing  schooners  which  have  been  traced  into  the 
full,  and  part  ownership  of  Herman  and  Isaac  Liebes,  are  found  in 
this  bill  as  the  Mary  Ellen,  the  San  Diego,  the  Alexander,  the  Otter, 
the  E.  E.  Webster,  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  and  the  La  Ninfa. 

ROOT'S  LETTER  ^EXONERATING  PEIRCE"  AND  THE  FRAUD  AT  THE 
HAGUE  CAN  NOT  BE  FOUND. 

Before  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee  January  25,  1907,  ex- 
Senator  Faulkner,  of  West  Virginia,  hired  attorney  of  the  seal  con- 
tractors, had  the  following  to  say  about  a  letter  written  by  Secretary 
of  State  Elihu  Root  in  1906,  which  completely  "  exonerated " 
H.  H.  D.  Peirce  from  any  blame  in  The  Hague  fraud  of  1902.  He  says 
on  pages  44,  45,  manuscript  notes  of  hearing: 

This  subject  came  up  when  Mr.  Peirce  was  appointed  minister  to  Sweden,  and  the 
whole  question  was  canvassed  and  examined  thoroughly  by  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations  of  the  Senate.  It  was  at  this  time  that  Secretary  Root'  wrote  a  letter  exon- 


FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA.  129 

erating  and  explanatory  of  the  whole  matter  to  the  President.  I  tried  to  secure  a  copy 
of  that  letter  to  be  embraced  in  this  record,  but  unfortunately  Mr.  Root  had  gone  to 
Canada,  and  I  could  not  get  it. 

And  Mr.  Root  returned  the  next  day,  January  26,  1907,  and  Mr. 
Faulkner  lost  all  interest  in  that  letter,  because  it  did  not  even  hint 
at  these  frauds  at  The  Hague,  or  refer  to  that  matter  of  the  James 
Hamilton  Lewis. 

THE  OFFICIAL  RESPONSIBILITY  OF  CHARLES  H.  TOWNSEND  FOR  THE 
FRAUD  PRACTICED  AT  THE  HAGUE,  JUNE  27-JULY  4,  1902,  AND  THE 
RECORD  OF  HIS  WORK  UP  TO  THAT  DATE  FROM  1883,  AS  AN  AGENT 
AND  PELAGIC  SEALING  EXPERT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  COMMISSION 
OF  FISH  AND  FISHERIES,  WHICH  GAVE  HIM  FULL  AND  COMPLETE 
ADVANCE  KNOWLEDGE  OF  THIS  BOGUS  PRACTICE  AFORESAID. 

Dr.  C.  H.  Townsend,  under  oath,  made  the  following  statement  to 
the  committee,  May  24,  1912,  to  wit  (pp.  734-735, hearing  No.  12): 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  dictated  some  matter  here  and  looked  it  over. 

My  acquaintance  with  matters  pertaining  to  the  fur  seal  may  be  stated  briefly  as 
follows: 

Nine  visits  to  the  Pribilof  Islands,  covering  the  breeding  seasons  of  nine  different 
years,  the  first  in  1885,  the  last  in  1900.  The  average  length  of  time  spent  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands  figures  up  35  days  a  year,  including  July  and  the  earlier  part  of  August. 
I  have  been  there  as  early  as  June  1  and  as  late  as  October  10.  These  visits  were  made 
under  the  auspices  of  the  Fish  Commission,  the  Treasury  Department,  or  the  Depart- 
ment of  State,  and  the  work  generally  consisted  in  the  preparation  of  charts  showing 
the  annual  distribution  of  seals  on  the  different  rookeries  and  the  making  of  photo- 
graphs to  demonstiate  the  correctness  of  the  charts.  During  all  of  the  later  visits  I 
participated  in  the  annual  census  of  the  seal  herd  and  frequently  made  cruises  on 
Government  vessels  in  the  vicinity  of  the  islands  for  the  purpose  of  collecting  infor- 
mation relative  to  pelagic  sealing.  The  photographs  and  charts  are  now  in  the  files 
of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  and  some  of  them  have  been  published  along  with  my  reports 
on  the  condition  of  the  seal  rookeries  and  on  pelagic  sealing. 

In  July,  1895,  I  visited  the  Commander  Islands — those  are  the  Russian  seal  islands— 
and  made  photographs. 

During  the  latter  part  of  May,  1892,  I  visited  Guadalupe  Island,  off  the  west  coast 
of  Mexico,  for  the  purpose  of  making  inquiries  relative  to  the  fur  seal  of  Lower  Cali- 
fornia. This  work  was  done  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary  of  State. 

In  1902  I  was  sent  by  the  Department  of  State  to  The  Hague  as  sealing  expert  in  the 
arbitration  of  sealing  claims  against  Russia.  In  1888,  as  naturalist  of  the  fisheries 
steamship  Albatross,  I  visited  a  rookery  of  the  Antarctic  fur  seals  in  Tierra  del  Fuego 
and  obtained  specimens  for  the  National  Museum. 

While  connected  with  the  fur-seal  investigations  of  1896-97  I  collected  the  log  books 
of  123  vessels  engaged  in  pelagic  sealing  and  prepared  a  large  chart  showing  the  distri- 
bution and  migration  of  the  American  and  Asiatic  fur-seal  herds. 

I  have  just  simply  thrown  that  together  to  show  that  I  have  a  certain  familiarity  with 
the  subject. 

This  statement,  carefully  prepared  and  read  from  a  typewritten 
sheet  by  Mr.  Townsend,  makes  his  relation  to  the  fur-  sealing  business 
of  the  United  States  Government,  as  an  "agent"  and  "assistant" 
and  a  "sealing  expert"  of  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Fisheries, 
the  United  States  Treasury  Department,  and  the  United  States 
Department  of  State,  perfectly  clear  and  definite. 

It  shows  that  before  Dr.  C.  H.  Townsend  was  sent  to  The  Hague 
in  1900  that  he  had  had  nine  years'  experience  personally  with  the 
fur-seal  herd  of  Alaska  and  of  study  into  the  business  of  pelagic 
sealing,  and  his  own  record  of  the  above  experience  is  supplemented 
by  the  statement  made  by  himself,  in  "Who's  Who"  for  1912,  that 
he  was  43  years  of  age  when  he  went  to  The  Hague,  possessed  of  all 
21588—13 9 


130  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

that  experience  above  cited  with  regard  to  the  seals  and  their 
hunters  in  the  sea. 

A  review  carefully  made  by  the  committee  of  Dr.  Townsend's 
record,  as  above  given  by  him,  from  the  official  documents  and 
records  of  the  Treasury  and  State  Departments  and  United  States 
Fish  Commission,  in  no  respect  differs  from  the  relation  of  it  as  he 
has  given  it  to  the  committee. 

During  the  progress  of  Dr.  Townsend's  examination,  on  page  750, 
hearing  No.  12,  Tie  further  defines  his  experience  as  a  "  sealing 
expert"  in  the  employ  of  the  United  States  Fish  Commission, 
to  wit: 

When  1  was  detached  from  the  work  at  the  seal  islands  by  this  commission,  in  1896, 
I  went  around  among  the  sealers  in  revenue  cutters  and  collected  data  to  make  a 
chart  of  seal  migrations.  I  collected  the  log  books  of  123  vessels  engaged  in  pelagic 
sealing  at  various  times  from  1883  to  ]897,  with  an  aggregate  catch  of  304,713  seals.  I 
platted  the  known  position  of  every  one  of  these  vessels  on  every  day  when  a  seal 
was  killed  in  any  part  of  the  Pacific  Ocean,  throughout  each  month's  sealing,  in  a 
different  color,  so  that  this  chart,  based  as  it  is  on  the  records  of  the  sealing  fleet  from 
1883  to  1897,  shows  where  the  seals  actually  were. 

As  Dr.  Townsend  first  entered  the  service  of  the  Government  at 
Baird,  Cal.,  in  1883,  as  an  " assistant"  of  the  United  States  Com- 
mission of  Fish  and  Fisheries,  this  statement  declares  that  he  had 
had  14  years'  experience  with  the  whole  business  of  land  killing  and 
sea  killing  of  our  fur-seal  herd  up  to  1897.  So,  when  he  went  to  The 
Hague  as  the  "seal  expert"  of  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Fisheries 
and  the  United  States  Department  of  State,  he  went  there  with  all 
the  authority  which  such  a  commission  commanded,  as  based  upon 
such  an  extended  experience  (p.  406-407,  H.  Doc.  No.  1,  57th  Cong., 
2d  ses?.). 

It  will  be  observed  that  he  says  he  had  been  busy  making  an 
exhaustive  examination  into  the  records  of  "  123  vessels"  engaged  in 
pelagic  sealing,  at  various  times  from  1883  to  1897. 

As  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  during  the  seasons  of  1890-91,  was 
one  of  the  largest  and  most  notorious  of  all  the  vessels  in  that  fleet, 
it  is  not  to  be  supposed  for  a  moment  that  Dr.  Townsend,  familiar 
since  1885  with  the  whole  story  annually  of  land  and  sea  killing, 
and  especially  charged  with  the  duty  of  looking  into  all  the  details 
of  pelagic  sealing  from  1883  to  1897,  could  have  overlooked  or 
shut  his  eyes  to  the  prominent  appearance  of  the  James  Hamilton 
Lewis  in  1890  and  her  spectacular  disappearance  in  1891.  How 
could  he,  when  the  daily  papers  of  the  Pacific  coast  recited  at  great 
length  the  strange  and  exciting  details  of  this  vessel's  career  in  1890 
and  finish  in  1891  ?  Columns  of  the  newspapers  of  San  Francisco 
were  filled  with  the  story  of  the  remarkable  catch — the  "high-line" 
catch  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  in  1890.  See,  for  instance,  the 
San  Francisco  Chronicle's  issue  of  September  14,  1890,  and  in  1891 
columns  of  the  same  city  papers,  all  of  them,  again  were  given  up, 
October  4,  1891,  to  the  story  of  how  she  had  been  captured  off 
Copper  Island,  August  2,  while  her  crew  was  ashore  killing  seals  as 
pirates.  (See  San  Francisco  Examiner  and  Chronicle,  issues  of  Oct. 
4,  1891.) 

Therefore,  when  Dr.  Townsend  made  the  following  answer  to  the 
committee,  he  told  the  truth  (p.  754,  hearing  Xo.  12). 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  131 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  will  ask  you  some  questions  now.  I  call  your  attention  to  the 
matter  appearing  at  pages  178  and  179  of  these  hearings.  You  will  find  there  what 
purporte  to  be  an  article  which  appeared  in  the  Cleveland  Leader,  on  Saturday,  August 
11,  1906.  Do  you  know  Capt.  Alexander  McLean? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Yes,  sir;  I  knew  one  of  the  McLeans,  and  I  think  it  was  Alex- 
ander— no,  sir;  it  was  not  Alexander;  it  was  Daniel  McLean,  his  brother,  whom  I 
knew. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  who  Alexander  McLean  was? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Yes,  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Who  was  he? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  He  was  a  man  who  led  a  great  many  raids  on  the  seal  islands;  I 
think  on  the  Commander  Islands  as  well  as  the  Pribilof  Islands. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  was  the  name  of  his  ship? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  can  not  say.  He  was  at  it  a  good  many  years  and  must  have  had 
a  good  many  ships.  I  can  not  remember  the  names  of  them. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  he  own  the  /.  Hamilton  Lewis? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  might  be  able  to  answer  that  question  if  I  had  the  proceedings 
of  The  Hague  Tribunal  before  me.  The  /.  Hamilton  Lewis  was  one  of  the  vessels  in 
question  there. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  He  was  in  the  employ  of  Mr.  Herman  Liebes,  was  he  not? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  know  whose  employ  he  was  in.  I  can  not  say  at  the 
present  moment. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  information  I  gather  from  this  statement  is  that  he  was  in  the 
employment  of  Herman  Liebes,  who  was  one  of  the  lessees  in  the  Xorth  American 
Commercial  Co. 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  think  it  is  stated  somewhere  in  the  The  Hague  Tribunal  hear- 
ings that  Liebes  unquestionably  owned  sealing  vessels  while  he  was  also  an  investor 
or  shareholder,  probably,  in  the  Fur  Seal  Co.  That  is  my  recollection. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  one  of  the  vessels  was  the  /.  Hamilton  Lewis? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  think  the  /.  Hamilton  Lewis  was  Liebes's  vessel. 

Mr.  McDERMOTT.  Was  that  a  vessel  engaged  in  pelagic  sealing? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  McGiiLicuDDY.  When  you  say  "sealing,"  do  you  mean  pelagic  sealing? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  MCDERMOTT.  They  are  pirates,  are  they  not? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Yes,  sir. 

As  the  "sealing  expert"  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  he  had  in  his 
own  mind,  by  1897,  this  direct  personal  knowledge  of  the  character 
of  that  pelagic  sealing  which  was  known  as  ''piracy/'  and  familiarly 
called  "raiding"  by  the  sealers  themselves.  Only  a  few  of  those 
pelagic  sealers  as  "captains,"  or  ''masters"  of  the  fleet  of  "123  ves- 
sels" which  Townsend  was  acquainted  with  (as  he  deposes  on  p. 
750),  were  guilty  of  this  raiding.  These  captains  who,  like  Alexander 
McLean  and  his  brother  Dan  McLean,  were  well  known  among  all 
sealers  and  often  unsparingly  denounced  by  the  law-abiding  sealing- 
vessel  owners  and  masters.  Had  Dr.  Townsend  been  deaf,  blind:  and 
dumb  during  that  period  from  1885  to  1897,  in  which  he  told  the  com- 
mittee he  was  "busy  studying  the  records  of  these  sealers,"  he  then 
could  not  have  escaped  some  knowledge  of  Alexander  McLean  as  a 
British  subject  ancl  "pirate"  up  to  1889  and  then  as  a  bogus 
"American  citizen"  in  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  during  1890  and 
1891. 

But  he  tells  the  committee  that  he  did  know  McLean  as  a 
"raider"  and  a  "pirate/'  on  page  754,  and  Dr.  Townsend  also  tells 
the  committee  that  he  knew  that  Liebes,  lessee  of  the  seal  islands, 
owned  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  when  he  was  promoting  the  claim 
of  ''Max  Waizman"  (the  "dummy"  owner)  and  the  British  pirate, 
Alexander  McLean,  as  the  •'American  owner  and  master"  of  the  James 
Hamilton  Ltir'<*  at  The  Hague,  June  27-July  4,  1902.  (See  pp. 
407-441,  H.  Doc.  Xo.  1,  57th  Cong..  2d  sees, 


132  FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 

Now,  what  were  those  influences  which  caused  this  sworn  official, 
Dr.  Townsend,  to  present  and  urge  upon  the  Court  of  Arbitration  at 
The  Hague  this  claim  as  a  just  and  valid  one,  which  he  knew  at 
at  heart  and  in  truth  was  a  fraudulent  one  ? 

H.  H.  D.  Peirce,  Townsend's  associate,  as  Third  Assistant  Secre- 
tary of  State,  says  that  he,  Peirce,  was  in  the  game  for  the  fees;  for 
all  the  money  he  could  get  out  of  the  award  as  such — he  makes  no 
bones  about  it;  and  so  he  sued  Liebes  and  Tingle,  April  7,  1903,  for 
$11,333.33  fees  in  re,  this  award  for  the  owners  and  the  master  of  the 
James  Hamilton  Lewis,  viz,  $47,684.78.  (See  equity  suit  No.  23886; 
filed  Apr.  7,  1903;  United  States  Supreme  Court,  D.  C.;  H.  H.  D. 
Peirce  v.  Liebes  and  Tingle.) 

But  Townsend  denies  receiving  any  compensation,  or  having  any 
personal  interest  in  the  matter,  except  to  represent  to  the  court  that 
this  James  Hamilton  Lewis  was  a  vessel  "lawfully  cleared"  and  ik law- 
fully engaged"  in  pelagic  sealing.  He  describes  his  activities  to  the 
committee  (p.  758,  Hearing  No.  12),  to  wit: 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  do  not  want  him  to  make  a  statement  that  he  can  not  substan- 
tiate, but  I  would  like  to  know  now,  Dr.  Townsend,  in  what  capacity  you  were  at 
The  Hague  Tribunal  in  this  matter? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  In  the  progress  of  the  work  before  The  Hague  Tribunal  it  became 
necessary  for  the  Secretary  to  produce  information  on  various  sealing  matters,  such 
as  the  movements  of  sealing  vessels.  I  carried  along  with  me  a  trunk  full  of  log 
books  of  sealing  vessels.  We  would  have  before  us  the  charges  made  by  the  Russian 
representative  during  the  day,  and  we  would  work  all  night  preparing  something  to 
refute  the  charges.  I  carried  the  log  books  that  had  been  taken  from  the  vessels. 

So  when  the  Russians  charge  this  vessel,  the  James  Hamilton 
Lewis,  and  her  owners  and  master,  with  being  illegally  owned  by  the 
lessees,  and  as  such,  unlawfully  engaged,  together  with  the  record 
of  piracy,  Townsend  says  that  he  would  work  all  night  preparing 
something  to  refute  the  charges"! 

Did  Charles  H.  Townsend  properly  and  truthfully  refute  the 
charges?  Did  he  not  deceive  the  court?  Did  any  other  "expert" 
at  that  time  appear,  who  carried  the  indorsement  of  10  years7  experi- 
ence as  a  "sealing  expert"  by  his  Government,  before  the  court  ?  No. 

So,  on  the  strength  of  Townsend's  sworn  statements  made  to  the 
arbitrator,  Dr.  Asser,  he  awarded  November  29,  1902,  $28',588  with 
interest  at  6  per  cent  to  the  Lewis  claimants  (pp.  457-458,  H.  Doc. 
No.  1,  57th  Cong.,  2d  sess.). 

Indeed,  the  arbitrator  had  no  other  course ;  there  was  no  one  pres- 
ent to  appear  against  Townsend  who  could  show  any  " scientific" 
knowledge,  or  acquaintance  whatever,  with  the  business  of  pelagic 
sealing;  and,  that  no  doubt  should  remain  in  the  minds  of  the  in- 
terested parties  as  to  whom  he  was  indebted  for  that  information 
which  led  him  to  make  this  award,  Dr.  Asser,  (we  are  informed  on 
p.  440,  H.  Doc.  No.  1,  57th  Cong.,  2d  sess.),  states  as  follows,  to  wit: 

SESSION  OF  FRIDAY  MORNING,  JULY  4,  1902. 

The  session  opened  at  10  a.  m. 

The  arbitrator,  Mr.  Asser,  expressed  his  thanks  to  the  two  powers,  who  have  been 
pleased  to  have  done  him  the  honor  to  confer  upon  him  the  office  of  arbitrator.  He 
complimented  the  two  delegates  upon  the  preparation  of  the  memorandum  and  the 
rejoinders,  and  assured  them  of  his  appreciation  of  the  supplementary  information. 
He  thanked  the  experts  also.  The  task  of  the  Russian  experts,  who  were  obliged  to 
express  themselves  in  another  language,  was  particularly  difficult.  They,  nevertheless, 


FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA.  133 

made  clear  more  than  one  point.    He  particularly  thanked  Mr.  Charles  Townsend, 
who,  by  his  works  and  his  scientific  knowledge,  greatly  facilitated  the  task  of  the 
arbitrator.   JHe  thanked  the  secretaries  also. 
The  session  adjourned  at  11  o'clock. 

This  evidence  supplied  to  the  committee  by  Dr.  Townsend  himself, 
of  his  work  at  The  Hague,  makes  it  perfectly  clear  that  he  personalty 
knew  of  the  fact  that  Liebes  owned  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis, 
and  that  as  such  she  was  illegally  operating,  with  Liebes  holding  the 
lease  of  the  Seal  Islands.  He  also  admits  knowledge  as  early  as 
1897,  at  the  latest,  of  "123  sealing  vessels"  and  their  masters.  He 
could  not  have  failed  to  know  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  and  the 
lessees'  ownership  of  her,  or  of  the  fact  that  Alexander  McLean  was 
her  master,  and  a  British  pirate;  all  of  this  must  have  been  well 
known  to  him  by  1897,  for  he  says  so,  to  the  committee,  on  page 
754,  No.  12. 

What  was  the  interest,  after  aU,  which  drew  Dr.  Townsend  into 
making  this  false  showing  for  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  at  The  Hague  ? 
He  denies  receiving  any  money  from  Liebes  thus  (p.  819,  Hearing  13) : 

Mr.  McGiLLicuDDY.  How  large  was  your  compensation  from  Isaac  Liebes  for  your 
services  as  an  expert  at  The  Hague,  June  and  July,  1902,  in  getting  this  award  of 
$50,000  for  the  owners,  master,  and  crew  of  the  James  H.  Leunsf 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  was  paid  by  the  Fish  Commission. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  What  was  your  compensation? 

Dr.  TOWXSEXD.  I  was  not  paid*  by  Liebes  at  all. 

At  this  point  the  committee  finds  that  Dr.  Townsend  has  been  paid 
by  Liebes  one  sum  of  S186.57  for  "services  as  a  sealing  expert,"  etc. 
(See  p.  861,  Hearing  Xo.  13.)  This  sum  he  declares  was  not  received 
from  Liebes  uat  all."  But  the  official  record  of  its  payment  denies 
him.  Was  that  all  he  received  ?  Note  the  folio  whig: 

On  May  20th,  1902,  and  before  Dr.  Townsend  started  for  The 
Hague  with  Third  Assistant  Secretary  of  State  Pierce  from  Wash- 
ington, D.  C.,  Liebes's  agent,  George  R.  Tingle,  who  had  secured  the 
detail  by  George  M.  Bowers,  United  States  Fish  Commissioner,  of 
Townsend  for  service  in  re  James  Hamilton  Lewis  claim,  addressed  a 
letter  to  the  Secretarv  of  State,  in  which  he  asked  that  Townsend  be 
permitted  to  receive  nis  "expenses  and  fees"  for  services  as  " sealing 
expert,"  out  of  any  award  that  he.  Townsend,  should  secure  for  the 
Lewis  claimants  at  The  Hague.  Tingle  makes  the  same  request  in 
this  letter  for  the  services  of  H.  H.  D.  Pierce  as  " counsel"  for  the 
Lewis  claimants.  That  this  letter  should  have  been  written  without 
the  knowledge  or  consent  of  Dr.  Townsend  or  Mr.  Pierce  is  simply  an 
idle  assumption.  This  is  the  letter  which  declares  the  interest  that 
both  Townsend  and  Pierce  had  in  this  claim,  as  being  for  "expenses 
and  fees"  in  return  for  the  services  to  Liebes.  (Equity  Suit  No. 
23,886:  H.  H.  D.  Pierce  v.  Liebes,  Tingle,  et  al.,  April  7th,'  1903; 
docket  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  District  of  Columbia.) 

WASHINGTON-,  D.  C.,   ^fay  20,  1902. 

Mr.  SECRETARY:  In  view  of  the  request  of  the  arbitrator  that  experts  in  whaling 
and  sealing  be  sent  to  give  expert  opinions  in  the  arbitration  at  The  Hague  and  the 
importance  of  having  the  Hon.  H.  H.  D.  Peirce,  counsel  for  the  Government,  present 
at  the  hearing,  I  have  the  honor  to  request  on  behalf  of  the  claimants  for  the  seizure 
of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  that  all  expenses  of  such  experts,  and  of  Mr.  Peirce  as 
counsel,  in  making  the  journey  to  The  Hagua  and  return,  be  paid  and  charged  pro 
rata  to  the  claimants,  such  expenses  to  be  deducted  from  the  award  allowed  by  the 
arbitrator  and  paid  by  the  Russian  Government. 


134  FUK-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

As  there  are  two  classes  of  claims,  one  for  sealing  and  one  for  whaling,  I  have  the 
honor  to  request  that  the  expenses  and  fees  of  the  sealing  expert  be  charged  to  the 
claimants  in  the  sealing  case. 

I  have  further  the  honor  to  request  that  $1,000  be  paid  to  the  Hon.  Hertt  H.  H.  D. 
Peirce  for  his  unusual  expenses  up  to  date,  and  during  his  journey  as  an  advance 
upon  the  contingent  fee  which  will  be  due  him  from  the  award,  and  that  the  same 
be  deducted  from  the  award  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  when  paid. 
I  have  the  honor  to  be,  sir,  very  respectfully,  yours, 

(Signed)  GEO.  R.  TINGLE, 

Attorney  for  the  owners,  officers,  and  crew 

of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis. 
To  the  Hon.  JOHN  HAY,  Secretary  of  State. 

The  committee  can  find  no  exact  record  of  the  full  compensation 
which  Dr.  Townsend  received  for  his  " expenses  and  fees"  as  paid 
to  him  by  Liebes,  agreeably  to  the  above  understanding. 

When  Liebes  was  interrogated  (see  pp.  894-895,  Hearing  No.  13) 
he  said : 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Now,  here  is  something  that  I  did  not  ask  Mr.  Liebes.  In  the 
case  of  the  damages  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  did  you  settle  with  Tingle  and 
Peirce  individually?  And  how  with  C.  H.  Townsend? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  settled  with  the  parties  that  had  any  claims,  but  who  they  were 
I  do  not  know.  It  was  settled  through  my  attorneys  in  San  Francisco. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  This  is  a  question  by  Mr.  Elliott.  Mr.  Peirce  said,  on  page  785, 
that  Tingle  paid  him  10  per  cent,  that  to  ''somebody  else  5  per  cent, "  or  "  2£  per  cant, " 
that  that  was  the  equalization  of  the  attorneys'  fee  which  was  deducted  from  the 
award  made  for  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis,  which  you  received  in  the  James  Hamilton 
Lewis  case?  How  was  that? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  can  not  recall  the  circumstances. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Now,  here  is  a  question  that  Mr.  Elliott  does  not  ask.  Do  you 
know  that  the  attorneys  received  25  per  cent? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  don't' know  that. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  mean  Tingle  and  Peirce  and  somebody  else.  Now,  Peirce  says 
he  received  1.0  per  cent  and  that  Tingle  told  him  that  he  would  have  to  pay  5  per 
cent  or  1\  per  cent  to  somebody  else,  and  that  would  even  it  up  finally  between  him 
and  Peirce.  Do  you  know  anything  about  that? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  No,  sir. 

The  testimony  declares  that  no  other  parties  except  Tingle,  Peirce, 
and  Townsend  appear  as  attorneys  or  " experts"  in  making  up  and 
presenting  this  fraudulent  claim  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  at 
The  Hague,  June  27-July  4,  1902;  and  no  hint,  even,  of  any  other 
party,  or  parties,  is  recorded,  save  Liebes,  who  as  Tingle's  ''client" 
and  the  " owner"  of  the  s a4 d  vessel  and  " claim"  is  held  responsible 
for  the  division  of  this  award  of  $50,000,  which  he  makes  as  such,  on 
April  24,  1903,  between  Tingle,  Townsend,  Peirce,  and  himself. 
(See  p.  861,  Hearing  No.  13;  and  p.  785,  Hearing  No.  12.) 

This  sum  of  the  award  was  paid  to  Tingle  and  Liebes  by  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury;  and  the  State  Department  " memorandum" 
of  the  payments  shows  that  Tingle  divided  $13,049  between  Peirce, 
Townsend,  and  himself  as  "fees."  Peirce  affirms  that  division  by 
Tingle,  on  page  785,  Hearing  No.  12.  Townsend  denies  it.  The 
official  record  shows  that  Tingle  did  make  that  division,  as  Peirce 
swears.  (See  p.  861,  Hearing  No.  13;  p.  785,  Hearing  No.  12.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  135 

Townsend^admits  his  hand  in  the  fraud  (Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  734, 
755,  May  24,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept,  C.  and  L.): 

COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 
DEPARTMENT  OP  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Friday,  May  24,  1912. 
The  committee  this  day  met,  Hon;  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman)  presiding. 

STATEMENT   OF   DR.    CHARLES   H.    TOWNSEND,  OF   NEW   YORK. 

The  witness  was  duly  sworn  by  the  chairman. 

The  CHAIRMAN*.  What  is  your  full  name? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Charles  Haskins  Townsend. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Where  do  you  live? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  live  in  New  York.  I  have  lived  there  for  some  time.  I  am 
from  Pennsylvania,  where  my  family  is  living. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  your  business? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  charge  of  the  aquarium  in  New  York;  I  am  the  director. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  How  long  have  you  held  that  position? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Since  1902. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Are  you  a  member  of  the  advisory  board  on  the  fur  seals? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  believe  I  have  that  privilege. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  was  the  dispute  which  was  settled  by  The  Hague  tribunal? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  The  matter  pending  there  was  whether  the  United  States  was 
entitled  to  damages  for  sealing  vessels  seized  by  Russia. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Was  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis  one  of  them? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  That  was  one  of  the  vessels  seized,  I  am  pretty  sure. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Who  represented  the  Government  before  this  tribunal? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  The  Assistant  Secretary  of  State. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Who  was  he? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Mr.  Pelrce. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Were  you  there  also? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Yes.  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  In  what  capacity  were  you  there? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Mr.  Peirce  took  me  along  as  a  sealing  expert. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  To  assist  him  in  what  he  was  doing? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Yes,  sir:  to  assist  in  handling  the  case  over  there. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  you  know  at  the  time  that  they  were  the  owners  of  these 
vessels  in  which  this  pirate  turned  up? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Xo;  I  never  knew  anything  about  that  until  those  things  were 
brought  out  at  The  Hague. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  was  developed  at  The  Hague  that  the  Liebes  were  the  owners 
of  this  vessel? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  That  is  my  recollection. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  I  suppose  that  is  irf  the  public  records? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Everything,  sir,  that  is  connected  with  the  matter  must  be  between 
the  covers  of  that  book  and  be  between  the  covers  of  some  other  public  document 
in  which  the  matter  was  brought  up  a  year  or  so  later  on,  perhaps  by  Mr.  Elliott.  But 
it  is  all  published. 

Mi.  ELLIOTT.  When  this  was  brought  out  at  The  Hague,  what  did  you  advise  Mr. 
Peirce  to  do,  as  his  "expert  pelagic  sealing  adviser"? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  know  that  Mr.  Peirce  evei  asked  me  for  advice  over  there. 
He  instructed  me  to  produce  certain  documents  that  would  help  him  refute  claims, 
etc.  I  was  a  statistician. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  produce  any  documents  that  refuted  Liebes's  claim? 

Di.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  no  recollection  in  regard  to  it.  Whatever  was  done  is  in 
the  book. 


136  FUK-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 

The  lessees  demand  the  rejection  of  the  recommendations  of  the 
sworn  agents  of  the  Government,  and  secure  the  removal  of  Charles  J. 
Goff,  chief  special  agent  in  charge,  with  their  own  men,  Williams  and 
Brown,  as  successors,  April  5,  1891: 

CONCERNING  THE    " OGDEN   MILLS   LETTER"   TO   SECRETARY  CHARLES    FOSTER,    APRIL  2, 

1891,    AND   ITS    INCLOSURES. 

[See  pp.  311,  312,  Hearing  No.  7.] 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  On  Saturday,  August  5,  1911,  Mr.  Bowers  read  into  the  record  of  this 
committee,  for  the  purpose  of  discrediting  me,  a  copy  of  a  letter  which  I  have  searched 
in  vain  for  during  the  last  16  years;  it  was  the  "Ogden  Mills  letter"  of  April  2,  1891; 
it  asked  Secretary  Charles  Foster,  Treasury  Department,  to  immediately  overrule  all 
the  sworn  official  reports  of  his  own  special  agents  on  the  seal  islands,  and  issue  to  the 
North  American  Commercial  Co.  (the  lessees)  a  permit  to  kill  60,000  seals  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands  during  the  season  just  ahead — the  summer  of  1891  ("if  they  can  be 
found"). 

These  agents  of  the  Treasury  on  the  seal  islands,  four  of  them — Chief  Special  Agent 
Charles  J.  Goff,  and  assistants,  Joseph  Murray,  S.  W.  Nettleton,  and  A.  W.  Lavender, 
had  all  united  August  1-14,  1890,  in  specific  reports  which  urged  that  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  permit  no  killing  of  seals  in  1891  by  the  lessees,  and  for  an  indefinite 
future;  those  reports  were  supplemented  by  mine,  dated  November  19,  1890. 

The  tragic,  sudden  death  of  William  Windom,  January  29,  1891,  brought  a  successor 
to  the  Treasury  whom  the  lessees  seemed  to  have  completely  in  their  control,  for  so 
complete  was  that  control  that  the  following  astonishing  record  is  made  in  the  premises, 
started  April  25,  1891,  by  issuing  that  killing  order  April  11,  following  and  the  full 
sequence  of  the  "Ogden  Mills"  letter,  above  cited,  to  wit: 

The  sole  warrant  which  this  letter  gave  to  Secretary  Foster  for  asking  him  to  set 
aside  the  verdict  of  those  sworn  officials  above  cited  was  "the  inclosure  of  a  series  of 
five  affidavits"  and  a  letter  "signed  by  Capt.  Healey,  U.  S.  R.  M.,"  all  of  whom 
declared  in  their  "affidavits  "  and  statements  that  after  that  date  on  which  the  lessees' 
work  was  stopped,  July  20,  1890,  the  seals  "hauled  out"  in  large  numbers,  suddenly, 
and  there  were  plenty  of  -fine  killable  seals  to  be  had,  and  would  have  been  secured  by 
the  lessees  if  Elliott  and  Goff  had  not  unjustly  and  perfidiously  used  their  official 
authority  to  so  order  that  stoppage. 

This  letter,  though  signed  by  Ogden  Mills,  was  really  written  by  George  R.  Tingle, 
who  was  the  general  manager  of  the  lessees  on  the  seal  islands.  Mr.  Mills  never  could 
have  written  such  a  false  and  detailed  letter  of  his  own  knowledge,  and  had  he  known 
•  the  truth  of  what  he  was  writing  about,  I  firmly  believe  that  he  would  have  refused 
to  sign  it.  I  can  not  think  otherwise,  because  it  was  such  a  letter. 

In  the  first  place,  all  those  affidavits  he  has  cited  must  have  been  made  after  the 
14th  of  August,  1890.  They  were  made  by  the  employees  of  the  North  American 
Commercial  Co.  under  pressure  from  George  R.  Tingle,  who  also  signed  one  of  them; 
they  were  supplemented  by  a  letter  to  Secretary  Charles  Foster,  from  Capt.  Michael 
Healey,  United  States  Revenue  Marine,  who  touched  at  the  islands  in  October,  1890, 
•and  who  wrote  to  Foster  about  the  "seals  being  as  numerous  then  as  they  had  ever 
appeared  to  him  in  all  previous  years."  (Think  of  such  a  statement  from  such  a  man 
who  knew  so  little!) 

Those  "affidavits"  were  simply  bogus — they  were  false  ab  initio.  They  were 
received  by  Mr.  Foster  on  April  3,  1891,  in  this  Mills  letter  aforesaid,  and  then  what 
happened? 

On  or  about  the  5th  of  April  Mr.  Charles  J.  Goff  was  called  into  Secretary  Charles 
Foster's  office  and  told  that  he  need  not  concern  himself  with  the  seal-island  business 
any  further;  that  "the  department  had  other  business  for  him  to  transact  at  Montreal," 
Canada  (i.-e.,  looking  after  immigration  cases).  Goff  was  directed  to  proceed  there 
forthwith  (and  he  did).  No  complaint  against  him  was  uttered  by  Foster — just  called 
him  in  and  sent  him  to  Montreal  in  the  "regular  order  of  official  business"  which 
governs  all  the  special  agents.  Goff  was  astonished;  he  was  speechless,  but  obeyed. 

Then  what  happened?  On  or  about  April  9  a  man  named  W.  H.  Williams  was 
appointed  "Chief  special  agent  of  the  seal  islands,  vice  Goff,  transferred;"  and,  on 
April  11,  this  man  started  for  San  Francisco  from  Washington  with  a  secret  permit 
from  Secretary  Charles  Foster,  dated  April  11,  to  the  North  American  Commercial  Co., 
giving  them  authority,  as  lessees,  to  kill  60.000  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  during 
the  season  just  ahead,  "  if  they  can  be  found,"  etc. 


FUB-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.       .  137 

The  following  history  of  what  the  lessees  demanded  and  secured 
on  the  seal  islands  June-August,  1891,  shows  the  same  greed  which 
was  exhibited  by  the  Russian  lessees  in  1819-20,  when  an  honest 
demand  was  made  of  them  to  stop  their  ruinous  work.  Like  our 
Mills  and  Elkins,  they  prevailed:  the  herd  was  ruined  and  well-nigh 
exterminated  l»y  1834.  (Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  662-663,  Apr.  24,  1912, 
H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  and  L.) 

There  is  a  written  record  officially  made,  of  the  fact  that  the  lessees 
actually  continued  to  kill  seals  illegally,  4,782  of  them — large,  choice 
seals,  after  they  had  been  ordered  not  to  do  so  by  the  Treasury 
Department.  (See  Exhibit  H.,  Kept.  Agents  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
Com.,  1913.) 

And  still  more,  if  it  had  not  been  for  that  protest  which  the  British 
commissioners  made  July  29,  as  stated  by  said  exhibit  in  that  "pri- 
vate" meeting,  those  lawless  lessees  and  their  official  confederates 
would  have  continued  to  kill  "food"  seals  during  the  rest  of  the  year. 

This  exhibit  declares  that  nothing  stood  between  the  lessees  and 
their  uninterrupted  seal  killing  during  the  modus  vivendi,  but  that 
quick  action  01  the  British  commissioners;  the  prohibition  of  the 
President,  the  specific  "orders"  of  the  Treasury  Department,  and 
their  repeated  reiteration  by  Chief  Special  Agent  Williams,  that 
nothing  to  exceed  7,500  "food"  seal  skins  should  be  taken,  was,  to 
them,  a  mere  use  of  words  to  conceal  their  illegal  work,  not  to  stop  it, 
&fulgur  brut  urn.  in  short. 

They  took  10,782  skins  on  St.  Paul,  when  ordered.  May  27,  1891, 
not  to  exceed  6,000  during  the  entire  season. 

They  took  3,218  seal  skins  on  St.  George,  when  ordered  not  to 
exceed  1,500  during  the  entire  season. 

And  they  did  afl  that  up  to  and  by  August  11,  1891,  with  the 
official  orders  prohibiting  that  killing  posted  June  13,  1891,  on  the 
islands. 

Mr.  J.  Stanley-Brown  who  shares  this  malfeasance  with  Williams 
(W.  H.)  in  1891,  came  up  again  June  9,  1892,  as  the  United  States 
chief  special  agent,  and  on  Friday,  July  8  (1892),  following  turned 
the  entire  control  of  the  killing  over  to  the  lessees,  and  for  that  service 
he  was  made  the  "  superintendent "  of  the  lessees'  business  on  the 
islands  in  June,  1894.  (See  Exhibit  B,  Kept.  Agents  H.  Com.  Exp., 
Dept.  Com.,  Aug.  30,  1913.) 

W.  H.  Williams,  the  agent  who  was  put  suddenly,  April  5,  1891,  in 
Goff  's  place  by  Charles  Foster,  and  who  was  so  selected  because  Foster 
had  complete  control  over  him,  went  up  to  St.  Paul's  Island,  and 
landed  there  June  10,  1891.  He  was  also  accompanied  by  Joseph 
Stanley-Brown,  who  went  as  Charles  Foster's  "own  man"  to  get  the 
facts. 

It  will  be  noted  in  the  foregoing  statement  that  when  Williams 
after  cooperating  with  Brown  in  this  illegal  killing  of  some  14,000 
seals  during  the  season  of  1891,  in  violation  of  the  international  law 
which  fixed  it  at  7,500  for  that  year,  it  will  be  noted  that  he  leaves 
the  islands  on  August  11,  1891,  and  returns  to  Washington. 

Does  he  ever  return  to  the  islands  ?  Xo.  Mr.  Joseph  Stanley- 
Brown  takes  his  place,  and  on  Thursday,  June  9,  1892,  arrives  on 
St.  Paul's  Island  as  the  chief  special  agent  in  charge. 


138  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

What  had  Williams  done?     Why  was  he  quietly  put  over,  am 
"transf erred  "  to  London,  as  Goff  before  him  had  been  transferred 
Montreal  ? 

He  was  "  transferred  "  because  he  spoke  plainly,  after  his  impleasanl 
experience  on  the  islands  during  the  summer  of  1891,  as  a  tool  of  th< 
lessees.  He  told  his  friends  at  home  and  in  Washington  that  tl  " 
work  on  the  islands  must  stop  and  the  lessees  put  out;  he  saw  tl 
greedy  hand  that  prevented  any  settlement  with  Great  Britain,  an< 
was  ashamed  of  his  part  in  the  business  of  illegally  killing  those  sei  * 
under  the  whip  of  the  lessees,  and,  among  other  plain  truths,  he  said: 

In  my  opinion  the  only  way  to  save  the  Pribilof  herd  is  by  an  entire  cessation 
sealing  for  a  considerably  period.     I  have  heard  diverse  views  on  this  subject,  am 
about  closed  seasons  of  1  to  10  years  as  being  the  only  way  to  restore  the  herd  to  its 
best  form.     I  believe  in  10  years. 

Whatever  period  is  adopted  it  should  involve  the  entire  cessation  of  seal  killing  on 
the  islands.  Of  course,  I  am  speaking  unofficially,  as  I  have  no  part  in  the  present 
deliberation  of  the  commission. — (Fur  Trade  Review,  Oct.  1,  1898,  p.  446,  New  York.) 

And  this  is  the  same  "scientist"  and  "keen  business  man"  who  was 
introduced  to  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor,  April  20,  1912,  in  the  following 
"modest"  terms  by  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  to  wit: 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  One  of  the  interesting  phases  of  this  question  that  has  attracted 
my  attention  is  the  attitude  which  some  person?  have  assumed  toward  the  large 
numbers  of  able  and  distinguished  naturalists  who  have  visited  the  seal  islands  and 
who  are  without  question  the  men  most  familiar  with  the  fur-seal  herd  and  the  many 
problems  connected  with  its  management  and  effective  conservation. 

Within  the  last  25  years  nearly  a  score  of  the  most  distinguished  naturalists  not  only 
of  this  country,  but  of  Great  Britain,  Canada,  and  Japan  have  visited  our  seal  islands 
for  the  specific  purpose  of  studying  the  habits  of  the  fur  seals  and  the  problems  con- 
nected with  the  proper  management  of  the  herd.  Among  these  gentlemen  I  may 
mention  the  following: 

Dr.  EVERMANN  (reading) : 

"Dr.  Barton  Warren  Evermann.  in  charge  of  the  Alaska  fisheries  service,  who,  as 
special  fur-seal  commissioner  in  1892.  spent  six  months  on  our  seal  islands  in  the 
North  Pacific  and  on  the  Russian  seal  islands,  studying  the  fur-seal  rookeries,  hauling 
grounds,  and  migrations. 

"Mr.  Joseph  Stanley-Brown,  of  New  York,  spent  the  seasons  of  1891.  1892,  1894, 
1895,  1896,  1897,  and  1899  on  the  seal  islands,  where,  as  naturalist  and  keen  business 
man,  he  made  very  thorough  study  and  investigations  not  only  of  the  habits  of  the 
seals,  but  very  valuable  study  of  the  economic  questions  involved."  (Hearing  No. 
10,  pp.  518-519;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept,  C.  &  L.) 

The  "value"  of  Joseph  Stanley-Brown's  "studies"  to  the  lessees 
can  be  at  once  grasped  by  the  most  casual  observer,  but  the  value 
thereof,  to  the  public  interests  which  he  was  sworn  to  guard,  and  paid 
to  do  so,  no  man  living  or  dead  can  find  the  least  eviaence  of. 

That  the  greedy  lessees  found  him  "  valuable, "  however,  goes  with- 
out question,  for  we  find  this  entry  made  on  page  222  of  the  St.  Paul 
Journal,  to  wit: 

WEDNESDAY,  JUNE  6,  1894. 

Steamer  Lakme,  of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.,  arrived  having  on  board, 
J.  B.  Crowley  and  wife,  as  chief  agent,  and  Mr.  Judge  and  wife;  also  Mr.  Brown,  super- 
intendent of  North  American  Commercial  Co.,  Mr.  Chicest?r  and  Mr.  Armstrong. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  139 

THE  BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES  INVOKES  THE  SERVICES  OF  JOSEPH  STANLEY- 
BROWN  TO  RENEW  THE  SEAL  LEASE,  AND  DEFEAT  PENDING  LEGIS- 
LATION WHICH  PREVENTS  THAT  RENEWAL. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  I  want  Mr.  Bowers  to  pay  some  attention  to  this  because  this  is 
important,  at  least  some  good  lawyers  have  told  me  that  it  is  very  important  to  him — 

"Being  an  official  letter  covering  a  'memorandum'  addressed  to  Mr.  George  M. 
Bowers,  commissioner,  urging  him  to  take  steps  to  prevent  the  passage  of  the  Dixon 
fur-seal  resolutions  introduced  in  the  United  States  Senate  by  Senator  Joseph 
M.  Dixon.  (S.  Res.  90,91,  92.) 

" December  7.  1909.  This  letter  from  the  'bureau,'  dated  December  16,  1909,  and 
signed  by  Barton  W.  Eyermann,  urges  Bowers  to  send  agents  to  New  York,  there  to 
'educate'  the  Camp  Fire  Club  and  induce  them  to  agree  to  the  'bureau's  idea  of 
renewing  the  lease.'  as  follows:" 

EXHIBIT  Xo.  6. 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR. 

BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 
Washington,  December  16,  1909. 
The  COMMISSIONER: 

The  Washington  Star  of  December  10  last  announced  that  the  Camp  Fire  Club,  of 
Xew  York,  had  inaugurated  a  campaign  to  save  the  fur-seal  herd  through  legislation 
designed  to  pi  event  the  re-leasing  of  the  sealing  right,  the  cessation  of  all  killing  on 
the  islands  for  ]0  years  except  fofnatives*  food,  and  to  secure  the  opening  of  negotia- 
tions with  Great  Britain  to  revise  the  regulations  of  the  Paris  tribunal.  As  the  result 
of  this  movement  on  December  7  three  resolutions  were  introduced  by  Senator  Dixon. 
of  Montana,  one  of  which  embodies  the  provisions  before  mentioned,  the  other  two 
calling  for  the  publication  of  fur-seal  correspondence  and  reports  since  1904. 

As  the  object  of  this  movement  is  at  variance  with  the  program  of  this  bureau  and 
of  the  recommendations  of  the  advisory  fur-seal  board,  notably  in  the  plan  to  prevent 
killing  and  the  renewal  of  the  seal  island  lease,  the  advisability  is  suggested  of  having 
Messrs.  Townsend,  Lucas,  and  Stanley-Brown  use  their  influence  with  such  members 
of  the  Camp  Fire  Club  as  they  may  be  acquainted  with  with  the  object  of  correctly 
informing  the  club  as  to  the  exact  present  status  of  the  seal  question  and  of  securing 
its  cooperation  to  effect  the  adoption  of  the  measures  advocated  by  this  bureau.1 

The  attached  letter  is  prepared,  having  in  view  the  object  stated. 

BARTON  W.  EVERMANN. 

''Exhibit  No.  7.  Being  the  official  letter  of  'George  M.  Bowers,  commissioner,'  to- 
Secretary  Commerce  and  Labor,  dated  February  8,  1910,  inclosing  copies  of  three 
letters,  all  urging  renewal  of  the  seal  lease  and  giving  the  reasons  of  the  writers  for 

^'COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 
"DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

"HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

"Friday,  June  9,  1911. 

.   "The  committee  met  at  10  o'clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman)  pre- 
siding. 

"TESTIMONY  OF  MR.  GEORGE  M.  BOWERS,  COMMISSIONER  OF  FISHERIES. 

"Mr.  BOWERS.  No  new  lease  was  made,  but  the  killing  was  done  under  govern- 
mental supervision. 

"Mr.  TOWNSEND.  You  will  be  questioned  about  that  later.  After  the  first  sugges- 
tion of  this  bill  you  know  of  no  efforts  that  were  made  to  delay  the  passage  of  that  legis- 
lation? 

"Mr.  BOWERS.  I  know  of  no  effort  that  was  made  to  delay  the  passage  of  that  legis- 
lation. 

"Mr.  TOWNSEND.  And  if  any  evidence  should  be  introduced  to  the  contrary,  it 
would  surprise  you? 

"Mr.  BOWERS.  So  far  as  I  am  concerned  it  would,  yes;  and  as  far  as  I  am  concerned 
it  would  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  and  the  department."  (Investigation  of  Fur-Seal 
Industry  of  Alaska,  p.  73.)  (Hearing  No.  3,  p.  157,  July  6,  1911,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
C.  andL.) 


140  FUK-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

such  renewal,  to  wit,  H.  H.  Taylor,  president  N.  A.  C.  Co.  (lessees),  dated  January 
27,  1910;  C.  H.  Townsend,  for  'fur-seal  advisory  board,'  dated  January  31,  1910; 
Alfred  Fraser,  London  agent  for  the  N.  A.  C.  Co.  (lessees),  January  28,  1910,  as  follows: 

THE    OFFICIAL    RECORD    OF   THE    FRAUDULENT    SECRET    PERMIT    GIVEN 

BY  CHARLES    FOSTER  TO  MILLS,  ELKINS  AND  LIEBES  TO  KILL  SEALS 

60,000  SEALS — ON  APRIL  11,  1891,  AGAINST  THE  UNANIMOUS  OPPO- 
SITION OF  THE  AGENTS  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT  ON  THE  SEAL  ISLANDS 
OF  ALASKA. 

1890.  July  20.—  Chief  Special  Agent  Charles  J.  Goff  and  his  assist- 
ants on  the  Seal  Islands  01  Alaska  stop  the  lessees  from  killing  seals 
to-day,  thereon,  because  they  find  that  female  seals  "in  milk"  are 
being  slaughtered,  and  that  the  surplus  male  life  does  not  exist 
which  is  proper  to  kill. 

1890.  August  1. — Chief  Special  Agent  Goff  and  his  assistants, 
Murray,  Nettleton,  and  Lavender,  all  unite  in  separate  reports  to 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  in  asking  that  the  work  of  the  lessees 
be  suspended  at  once  on  the  islands  and  indefinitely. 

1890.  November  19. — Henry  W.  Elliott,  special  commissioner,  under 
authority  of  act  approved  April  5,  1890,  reports  urging  that  the  work 
of  the  lessees  be  suspended  at  once  and  indefinitely,  and  that  a  modus 
viyendi  be  established  with  Great  Britain  for  seven  years  whereby  no 
killing  in  the  sea  or  on  the  land  will  be  done  by  subjects  and  citizens 
of  the  high  contracting  parties. 

1891.  April  7. — Secretary  James  G.  Blaine  agrees  with  Sir  Julian 
Pauncefote,  the  British  ambassador,  to  a  'modus  vivendi  of  at  leats 
one  year  whereby  there  shall  be  no  killing  on  the  islands  or  in  the 
sea  of   fur  seals.     (See  British  Blue  Book:  Further  correspondence 
respecting  the  Bering  Sea  seal  fisheries.) 

No.  1. — The  Marquis  of  Salisbury  to  Sir  Julian  Pauncefote. 

[Telegraphic.] 

FOREIGN  OFFICE,  April  17,  1891. 

Bering  Sea. — Mr.  Elaine's  suggestion,  which  you  mention  in  your  private  letter  of 
the  7th  April,  that  pending  the  award  of  the  arbitration  on  the  Bering  Sea  question 
all  seal  fishery  should  be  stopped,  both  by  sea  and  land,  seems  worthy  of  consideration. 

If  we  approve  of  it,  would  Mr.  Blaine  prefer  that  the  proposal  should  come  from  us? 
(British  Blue  Book  entitled  '  'U.  S.,  No.  2,  1891:  Correspondence  respecting  the  Ber- 
ing Sea  fisheries, "  presented  to  both  houses  of  Parliament  by  command  of  Her  Majesty, 
June,  1891.  Printed  for  Her  Majesty's  Stationery  Office  by  Harrison  &  Sons,  St. 
Martin's  Lane,  printers  in  ordinary  to  Her  Majesty,  etc.) 

No.  3. — Sir  J.  Pauncefote  to  the  Marquis  of  Salisbury. 
[Telegraphic— Received  Apr.  23.] 

WASHINGTON,  April  23,  1891. 

I  have  the  honor  to  report  that  the  Secretary  of  State  returned  to  Washington  and 
invited  me  to  call  on  him. 

He  expressed  himself  as  gratified  at  the  favorable  consideration  given  by  Her  Maj- 
esty's Government  to  his  alternative  suggestion,  and  in  response  to  your  lordship's 
inquiry  he  said  that  he  would  prefer  that  the  proposal,  which  seemed  to  him  very  fair, 
should  come  from  Her  Majesty's  Government,  etc. 

At  this  point  I  can  recapitulate,  and  then  carry  the  story  of  Mr. 
Elaine's  duplicity  and  malfeasance  in  the  premises  down  as  follows, 
seriatim,  to  wit: 

March  15,  1891.  Sir  Julian  Pauncefote  urges  Mr.  Blaine  to  agree  upon  a  modus 
vivendi  for  the  coming  season  in  Bering  Sea,  whereby  no  killing  of  fur  seals  shall  be 
•done  on  the  Seal  Islands  of  Alaska  by  American  citizens  and  no  killing  at  sea  shall 


FUB-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  141 

be  permitted  for  British  subjects;  in  the  meantime  both  high  contracting  parties  shall 
carefully  study  the  question  and  then  agree  upon  a  plan  of  proper  resumption  of  seal 
killing,  etc. 

Mr.  Elaine  demurred  and  suggested  a  25-mile  zone  of  pelagic  prohibition  around 
the  Seal  Islands  instead;  to  this  Sir  Julian  objected,  saying  that  it  was  impracticable 
and  would  not  be  easily  enforced,  etc. 

April  7,  1891.  Sir  Julian  again  urges  Mr.  Elaine  to  unite  with  his  Government  in 
a  total  suspension  of  all  killing  of  fur  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  and  in  the  sea  of 
Bering,  during  the  coming  season  of  1891.  Mr.  Elaine  agrees  to  do  so  if  the  British 
Government  will  notify  him  of  its  desire  and  willingness  to  do  so. 

Sir  Julian  Pauncefote  then  mails  to  Lord  Salisbury  this  proposal  of  Mr.  Blaine  to 
stop  all  killing  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  during  the  season  of  1891,  if  the  British  Govern- 
ment will  prohibit  its  subjects  from  all  killing  of  fur  seals  at  sea  (in  Bering  Sea),  during 
this  period  aforesaid.  This  letter  sent  to  New  York  and  mailed  by  "special  post" 
on  this  day  and  date,  April  7,  1891,  to  London. 

April  11,  1891.  Secretary  Blaine,  without  informing  Sir  Julian,  violates  this  agree- 
ment of  April  7,  1891,  as  above  cited;  he  gives  to  the  lessees  of  the  Seal  Islands  (D.  O. 
Mills.  Isaac  and  Herman  Liebes,  Lloyd  Tevis,  and  S.  B.  Elkins)  a  secret  permit  to 
kill  60,000  seals  on  these  islands,  '  'if  they  can  be  found, "  during  the  season  of  1891. 

April  IS,  1891.  Charles  Foster,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  admits,  when  personally 
interrogated  by  Hon.  Wm.  McKinley  and  Henry  W.  Elliott,  that  he  has  given  this 
order  of  permission  to  kill  60,000  seals,  ' '  because  Blaine  authorizes  it,  and  has  told 
me  that  Salisbury  is  ugly  and  will  not  stop  his  people  from  killing." 

April 22,  1891-  Sir  Julian  Pauncefote  denies  that  his  Government  "is  ugly,"  and 
asserts  that  it  is  willing  to  stop  the  seal  slaughter. 

April  24,  1891.  Henry  W  Elliott,  in  a  half-column  letter  to  the  New  York  Evening 
Post  of  to-day's  issue,  under  caption  of  "  Some  seal  history,"  tells  this  story  of  Mr. 
Elaine's  duplicity  and  venality,  as  above  cited;  it  is  telegraphed  all  over  the  country, 
briefly,  and  on — " 

May  3,  1891 .  President  Harrison  vetoes  or  orders  the  cancellation  of  this  secret  and 
infamous  permit;  he  then  orders  steps  to  be  taken  in  the  State  Department  which 
result,  June  14,  1891,  in  the  modus  vivendi  being  officially  published,  as  originally 
suggested  by  Henry  W.  Elliott  November  19,  1890,  and  Sir  Julian  on  April  7,  1891, 
as  stated  above. 

With  this  clearly  and  indisputably  recorded  as  above,  it  is  now  in 
order  to  produce  the  cause  of  this  malfeasance  of  both  Secretary  James 
G.  Blaine  and  Secretary  Charles  Foster — what  was  the  pressure  upon 
those  high  officials  which  led  them  to  dishonor  the  trust  which  they 
were  sworn  to  observe  and  obey  for  the  public  good. 

We  now  observe  in  the  following  letter  of  April  2,  1891,  the  studied 
letter  of  the  lessees — the  deliberate  and  studied  foundation  of 
fraud  and  deceit  upon  which  Charles  Foster  was  compelled  to  stand 
suddenly  in  full  public  view,  May  3,  1891.  and — -fall- 

OFFICE  OF  THE  NORTH  AMERICAN  COMMERCIAL  Co., 

MILLS  BUILDING, 
New  York,  April  2,  1891. 
Hon.  CHARLES  FOSTER, 

Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  Washington,  D.  C. 

DEAR  SIR:  The  North  American  Commercial  Co.  begs  to  submit  for  your  considera- 
tion the  following: 

There  is  a  marked  difference  of  opinion  between  Mr.  Elliott,  special  agent,  and  the 
Treasury  agents  on  the  seal  islands  and  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.,  lessee 
of  those  islands,  as  will  appear  by  the  reports  of  the  Treasury  agents  and  statements  of 
the  agents  of  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.  and  others,  on  file  in  your  depart- 
ment. 

The  contest  to  obtain  the  new  lease  caused  some  irritation  and  feeling.  In  begin- 
ning operations  under  the  new  lease  it  was  natural  that  the  Treasury  agents  should 
sympathize  with  the  old  company.  The  Alaska  Commercial  Co.,  the  old  lessee,  made 
a  spirited  contest  to  have  the  new  lease  awarded  to  it.  Mr.  Elliott,  at  the  time  of  the 
bidding  and  for  15  years  before,  had  been  an  employee  of  the  Alaska  Commercial  Co. 
He  did  all  he  could  to  secure  the  new  lease  for  his  company.  He  urged  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  in  person  to  award  the  lease  to  the  Alaska  Commercial  Co.,  although  its 
bid  was  lower. 


142  FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Under  these  circumstances  it  was  unfortunate  that  Mr.  Elliott  should  have  been 
appointed  an  agent  to  report  on  the  condition  of  seals,  etc.,  under  a  special  act  of 
Congress  which  he  drafted  and  caused  to  be  passed  and  under  instructions  which  he 
wrote. 

It  was  also  unfortunate  that  extending  the  time  for  taking  seals  on  the  islands  should 
have  been  left  to  the  discretion  of  Mr.  Goff,  Treasury  agent,  because  by  not  exercising 
this  dicretion  wisely  and  extending  the  time  beyond  July  20  the  United  States  lost 
in  taxes  nearly  $400,000  and  the  lessee  one-half  as  much. 

Your  attention  is  called  to  the  fact  that  in  the  advertisement  for  bids  to  lease  the 
islands  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  expressly  stated  that  for  the  year  1890  the  lessee 
should  take  60,000  seals.  It  is  also  provided  in  the  lease  that  the  new  company  should 
take  this  number,  yet  the  Treasury  agent  saw  fit,  in  the  discretion  given  him,  to  arbi- 
trarily forbid  the  new  company  from  taking  more  than  20,995  seals,  which  was  not 
only  a  great  loss  to  both  the  Government  and  lessee,  but  in  violation  of  the  statements 
contained  in  the  advertisement  and  the  terms  of'the  lease.  The  record  will  show  that 
on  the  20th  day  of  July,  the  last  day  of  the  killing,  2,000  seals  were  taken,  and  the  proof 
is  at  hand  both  positive  and  abundant  that  if  the  time  had  been  extended  until  the 
10th  of  August  the  full  quota  of  60,000  killable  seals  could  have  been  taken.  The 
company  states  as  a  reason  why  the  full  quota  was  not  taken  by  the  20th  of  July  was 
because  the  salmon,  which  largely  constitute  the  food  of  the  seals,  were  two  or  three 
weeks  later  going  north  last  season,  which  will  account  for  the  seals  appearing  two  or 
three  weeks  later  on  the  islands  than  in  former  years. 

Secretary  Windom  regarded  the  failure  to  take  60,000  seals  as  a  mistake,  and  one 
he  wished  he  could  repair.  Considering  this,  and  for  other  reasons,  he  said  to  the 
attorney  of  the  N.  A.  C.  To.,  early  in  February,  that  it  was  his  purpose  to  allow  the 
company  to  take  60,000  this  year,  and  100,000  in  the  discretion  of  the  Treasury  agent, 
if  the  seals  appeared  on  the  islands. 

It  is  claimed  by  the  company  that  granting  a  positive  and  definite  order  to  take 
60,000  killable  seals  this  year  of  the  kind  named  in  the  laws  and  regulations  can  not 
work  harm  to  the  Government  nor  deplete  the  herd.  If  the  killable  seals  do  not 
come  upon  the  islands  they  can  not  be  taken;  and  if  they  do,  the  company  should  be 
allowed  to  take  them. 

Mr.  Elliott  was  on  the  islands  in  1874,  and  did  not  return  until  1890,  a  period  of  15 
years.  Mr.  Tingle,  whose  report  and  protest  against  Treasury  Agent  Goff's  arbitrary 
action  is  on  file,  was  Treasury  agent  on  the  islands  for  4  years — from  1885  to  ]889 — 
during  which  time  he  spent  18  months  continuously  on  the  islands.  His  opportunities 
for  observing  the  seals  and  seal  life  and  understanding  their  habits,  of  recent  years, 
has  been  much  more  extended  than  that  of  Mr.  Elliott.  As  against  Mr.  Elliott's  report 
and  those  of  the  Treasury  agents,  which  it  is  believed  Mr.  Elliott  inspired,  stands  the 
testimony  of  Mr.  Tingle;  the  sworn  statements  now  on  file  in  your  department  of 
Antoine  Melovidoff,  brother-in-law  of  Mr.  Elliott,  a  native  of  the  islands  and  governor 
of  St.  Paul;  that  of  Daniel  Webster,  the  oldest  sealer  on  the  island;  the  letter  of  Dr. 
W.  H.  Mclntyre,  now  World's  Fair  Commissioner  from  Vermont,  who  spent  17  years 
on  the  islands;  as  also  statements  of  J.  C.  Reclpath,  C.  A.  Fowler,  Capt.  * 
Healey,  and  Dr.  L.  A.  Noyes — all  except  Mr.  Tingle  disinterested  parties. 

It  is  submitted  that  this  mass  of  testimony  and  sworn  statements  is  entitled  to  due 
weight  and  consideration,  and  if  not  sufficient  to  overcome  the  reports  of  Mr.  Elliott 
and  the  Treasury  agents,  they  are  at  least  strong  enough  to  raise  a  doubt,  the  benefit 
of  which  should  be  given  to  the  Government  and  lessee  and  be  settled  only  by  impartial 
testimony  and  by  persons  who  had  no  connection  with  the  old  company  and  no  preju- 
dices against  the  new. 

It  is  said  that  parties  interested  in  the  old  company  declared,  on  their  failure  to 
obtain  the  new  lease,  that  they  would  break  up  the  new  company  in  two  years.  It  ia 
submitted  that  after  the  company  has  spent  many  hundred  thousand  dollars  in  pre- 
paring to  comply  with  the  obligations  under  the  new  lease,  and  the  losing  of  40,000 
skins  out  of  60,000  the  first  year,  and  the  proposition  of  Mr.  Elliott  to  take  none  this 
year,  would  nearly  reach  the  point  of  breaking  up  the  company. 

It  is  claimed  by  the  present  lessee  that  the  taking  of  killable  seals  under  the  rules 
and  regulations  of  the  department  does  not  deplete  the  seal  herd.  By  the  terms  of 
the  lease  it  can  not  be  terminated  except  for  cause.  If  the  Government  can  suspend 
taking  seals  for  one  year,  it  may  for  any  number  of  years,  which  would,  in  effect, 
abrogate  the  lease.  The  Government  is  bound  by  the  terms  of  the  lease  as  well  as 
the  lessee.  It  has  for  a  valuable  consideration  leased  the  exclusive  right  to  the  North 
American  Commercial  Co.  for  20  years  to  take  seals  on  the  islands  of  St.  Paul  and 
St.  George.  It  may  be  said  that  the  Secretary  has  the  power  under  the  law  to  limit 
or  designate  the  number  of  seals  to  be  taken;'  the  company  claims  this  is  to  be  rea- 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  143 

sonably  construed  and  does  not  mean  that  the  lessee  shall  be  entirely  deprived  of 
taking*  seals. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  pending  arbitration  if  England  should  stop  the  Canadian 
poachers  from  taking  seals  in  the  Bering  Sea  that  the  United  States  should  agree  to 
suspend  the  taking  of  seals  on  land.  It  is  not  clear  what  right  England  has  to  make 
any  demand  upon  the  United  States  to  stop  taking  animals  on  its  own  soil.  But  it 
is  submitted  on  behalf  of  the  company  that  the  United  States  has  leased  the  exclu- 
sive right  to  take  seals  on  the  Pribilof  group  of  islands,  and  the  controversy  between 
the  two  countries  presents  itself  with  the  lease  in  existence  and  the  obligations  of 
the  United  States  to  the  lessee  in  full  force.  The  lease  stands  as  part  of  the  condition 
of  affairs  that  can  not  be  changed,  and  while  the  United  States  can  not  terminate  the 
lease  except  for  cause,  it  should  not  be  asked  that  it  be  done  pending  arbitration  or 
as  a  preliminary  to  a  fair  settlement. 

The  interests  of  the  Government  and  lessee  are  the  same  and  not  in  any  sense 
antagonistic  and  should  not  be  made  so.  The  lessee  is  as  much  interested  "in  pre- 
serving seal  life  as  the  Government,  and  whenever  it  is  shown  to  be  in  the  interest 
of  preserving  seal  life  it  will  willingly  consent  to  a  reasonable  suspension  of  killing 
seals  on  the  islands.  But  the  company  feels  that  with  the  present  light  on  the  sub- 
ject it  would  be  unfair  both  to  the  Government  and  to  it  to  suspend  taking  seals  for 
this  year.  The  company,  in  obedience  to  the  terms  of  the  lease  and  by  way  of  prep- 
aration for  this  year's  work,  has  already  incurred  and  is  still  incurring  heavy  expenses. 
Respectfully, 

(Signed)  NORTH  AMERICAN  COMMERCIAL  Co., 

By  OGDENT  MILLS. 

Every  paragraph  in  that  letter  of  Ogden  Mills  is  false;  he  signs  it 
for  the  lessees.  D.  O.  Mills,  Lloyd  Tevis,  Herman  and  Isaac  Liebes, 
and  S.  B.  Klkins  (soon  to  be  Harrison's  Secretary  of  War,  and  then 
after,  in  1894,  Senator  from  West  Virginia).  The  absolute  untruth 
and  fraud  of  its  conception  is  fully  bared  by  the  sworn  testimony  in 
Hearing  Xo:  10,  pages  G62-668/ April  24*  1912.  (H.  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  C.  and  L.). 

Think  of  the  strange  stupidity  of  the  following  brazen  untruth— 
of  that  untruth  which  bristles  all  through  every  paragraph  in  this 
venal  letter,  to  wit: 

Secretary  Windom  regarded  the  failure  to  take  60,000  seals  as  a  mistake,  and  one 
he  wished' he  could  repair.  Considering  this,  and  for  other  reasons,  he  said  to  the 
attorney  of  the  N.  A.  C.  Co..  early  in  February,  that  it  was  his  purpose  to  allow  the 
company  to  take  60,000  this  year,  and  100,000  in  the  discretion  of  the  Treasury  agent, 
if  the  seals  appeared  on  the  islands. 

William  Windom  dropped  dead  into  his  chair,  on  the  evening  of 
January  29,  1891,  at  tne  banquet  of  the  Xew  York  Chamber  of 
Commerce,  in  that  city. 

Yet  this  falsifier  who  pens  the  above  tells  us  that  "  early  in  Feb- 
ruary" following,  Windom  intended  to  reverse  his  own  sworn  agents 
and  let  these  public  enemies  have  full  swing  at  the  public  property 
then  in  dire  jeopardy  on  the  Seal  Islands  of  Alaska. 

William  Windom  in  the  presence  of  Henry  W.  Elliott,  at  the  resi- 
dence of  James  G.  Elaine,  in  Washington,  January  6,  1891,  agreed  with 
Mr.  Elaine  to  a  total  suspension  of  the  lessees  work  for  five  years 
from  date,  if  the  British  Government  would  compel  the  prohibition 
of  pelagic  sealing  in  Bering  Sea  and  the  North  Pacific  for  the  same 
length  of  time  from  date. 

This  letter  of  Ogden  Mills  urging  Foster  to  set  aside  the  unanimous 
testimony  of  his  own  sworn  agents,  and  let  the  lessees  have  full 
sweep  at  the  public  preserves  on  the  Seal  Islands  of  Alaska  was 
carefully  planned  and  prepared  with  the  full  knowledge  of  D.  O. 
Mills,  of  Lloyd  Tevis,  of  S.  B.  Elkins,  of  Isaac  and  Herman  Liebes, 


144  FTJK-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 

all  stockholders  in  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.,  or  the  agent 
of  theirs  as  lessees  of  the  Seal  Islands  of  Alaska. 

Upon  this  fraudulent  and  lying  lessees'  letters  authority,  and  all 
of  those  bogus  worthless  perjured  affidavits  signed  by  their  own  hired 
men  and  tools,  Charles  Foster  actually,  three  days  after  he  had 
received  this  rascally  letter,  reversed  the  ruling  of  his  own  agents 
(the  agents  of  Wm.  Windom)  and  gave  Elkins  and  Liebes  a  secret 
permit  to  kill  60,000  seals  on  April  1 1  following. 

Can  a  better  exhibition  of  turgid  self-confessed,  wicked,  malfea- 
sance in  high  official  position  be  found  ? 

In  order  that  no  question  shall  be  raised  or  can  be  raised  sensibly 
as  to  the  fact  that  Charles  Foster  did  give  that  secret  permit  of 
April  11,  1891,  as  above  stated,  I  submit  the  letters  of  Mr.  Foster, 
who  admits  that  malfeasance  to  me,  after  I  had  put  the  question 
squarely  up  to  him  and  while  witnesses  to  the  truth  of  it  were  then 
living,  and  who  stood  ready  to  prove  it,  if  Foster  presumed  to  deny  it. 

THE  SUBORNATION  OF  THE  STATE  AND  TREASURY  DEPARTMENTS  BY 

THE  SEAL  LESSEES. 

On  the  2d  of  May,  1912,  the  following  sworn  statement  was  given 
to  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce and  Labor,  which  exhibits  the  improper  influence  possessed 
and  used  by  the  lessees,  to  wit: 

NOTE    FOR  HON.    JOHN   H.    ROTHERMEL. 

When  John  Hay  asked  me  on  June  20,  1903,  to  take  this  letter  of  mine,  as  written 
to  Hon.  John  A.  Kasson,  of  May  10,  1903,  with  its  recitation  of  the  amazing  revelation 
of  Mr.  Elaine's  malfeasance  as  made  by  Sir  Julian  Pauncefote,  and  inclosed  to  Mr.  Hay 
by  Mr /Kasson,  for  this  purpose,  as  stated  by  the  latter,  Mr.  Hay  said:  "This  is  a  matter 
wnich  I  can  not  discuss  with  you.  I  know  it  is  true,  and  that  makes  any  use  of  it  at 
this  time  and  in  this  department  impossible.  It  is  best  returned  to  you,  and  my 
desire  is  that  nothing  be  said  in  the  premises  at  the  present  time  and  while  this  busi- 
ness is  pending  between  Canada  and  ourselves." 

Just  think  of  this  terrible  revelation  made  by  Sir  Julian  of  Mr.  Elaine's  duplicity, 
and  worse,  as  Secretary  of  State,  thus  made  to  me,  April  22,  1891 — think  of  it  in  the 
light  of  the  following  facts,  to  wit: 

March  15,  1891.  Sir  Julian  Pauncefote  urges  Mr.  Elaine  to  agree  upon  a  modus 
vivendi  for  the  coming  season  in  Bering  Sea,  whereby  no  killing  of  fur  seals  shall  be 
done  on  the  Seal  Islands  of  Alaska  by  American  citizens  and  no  killing  at  sea  shall 
be  permitted  for  British  subjects;  in  the  meantime  both  high  contracting  parties  shall 
carefully  study  the  question  and  then  agree  upon  a  plan  of  proper  resumption  of  seal 
killing,  etc. 

Mr.  Elaine  demurred  and  suggested  a  25-mile  zone  of  pelagic  prohibition  around 
the  Seal  Islands  instead;  to  this  Sir  Julian  objected,  saying  that  it  was  impracticable 
and  would  not  be  easily  enforced,  etc. 

April  7,  1891.  Sir  Julian  again  urges  Mr.  Elaine  to  unite  with  his  Government  in 
a  total  suspension  of  all  killing  of  fur  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  and  in  the  sea  of 
Bering  during  the  coming  season  of  1891.  Mr.  Elaine  agrees  to  do  so  if  the  British 
Government  will  notify  him  of  its  desire  and  willingness  to  do  so. 

Sir  Julian  Pauncefote  then  mails  to  Lord  Salisbury  this  proposal  of  Mr.  Elaine  to 
stop  all  killing  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  during  the  season  of  1891  if  the  British  Govern- 
ment will  prohibit  its  subjects  from  all  killing  of  fur  seals  at  sea  (in  Bering  Sea)  during 
this  period  aforesaid.  This  letter  sent  to  New  York  and  mailed  by  "special  post" 
on  this  day  and  date,  April  7,  1891,  to  London. 

April  11,  1891.  Secretary  Elaine  without  informing  Sir  Julian  violates  this  agree- 
ment of  April  7,  1891,  as  above  cited;  he  gives  to  the  lessees  of  the  Seal  Islands  (D.  0. 
Mills,  Isaac  and  Herman  Liebes,  Lloyd  Tevis,  and  S.  B.  Elkins)  a  secret  permit  to 
kill  60,000  seals  on  these  islands,  "if  they  can  be  found,"  during  the  season  of  1891. 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA.  145 

April  13,  1891.  Charles  Foster,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  admits,  when  personally 
interrogated  by  Hon.  William  McKinley  and  Henry  \V.  Elliott,  that  he  has  given  this 
order  of  permission  to  kill  60,000  H-uL-  "because  Elaine  authorizes  it.  and  has  told 
me  that  Salisbury  is  ugly  and  will  not  stop  his  people  from  killing." 

April  22,  1891.  Sir  Julian  Pauncefote  denies  that  his  Government  "is  ugly,"  and 
asserts  that  it  is  willing  to  stop  the  seal  slaughter.  * 

April  24,  1891.  Henry  W.  Elliott  in  a  half-column  letter  to  the  New  York  Evening 
Post  of  to-day's  issue,  under  caption  of  "Some  seal  history."  tells  this  story  of  Mr. 
Elaine's  duplicity  and  venality,  as  above  cited;  it  is  telegraphed  all  over  the  country, 
briefly,  and  on — 

May  3.  1S91.  President  Harrison  vetoes  or  orders  the  cancellation  of  this  secret  and 
infamous  permit;  he  then  orders  steps  to  be  taken  in  the  State  Department  which 
result,  June  14,  1891.  in  the  modus  vivendi  being  officially  published,  as  originally 
suggested  by  Henry  W.  Elliott,  November  19,  1890,  and  Sir  Julian,  on  April  7,  1891, 
as  stated  above. 

HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

WASHINGTON',  D.  C..  May  2,  1912. 

(Hearing  No.  10,  p.  672,  May  2,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

In  further  illustration  of  this  subornation,  and  proof  of  it,  Mr. 
Elliott,  on  January  1*0.  1907,  gave  to  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee 
of  the  H  MI.-M'  if  Representatives  the  following  original  letters  of 
Charles  Foster  which  admit  that  he  issued  that  secret  order  to 
kill  60,000  seals  on  April  11,  1891,  and  which  permit,  after  its  ex- 
pnsun-  April  2 1?  by  Elliott,  was  "officially"  dated  "May  27,"  and 
then  canceled  "officially"  May  27,  1891,  by  telegraph  to  Williams, 
at  San  Francisco,  Cal. 

CHARLES  FOSTER'S  ADMISSION  TO  ELLIOTT  THAT  HE  HAD  ISSUED  A  SECRET  PERMIT  TO 
KILL  60,000  SEALS,  APRIL  11.  1891. 

[Copies  of  the  original  letters  made  by  Ways  and  Means  Committee,  H.  R.,  Jan.  25, 1907:  Hearing  on  Fur 
Seals.     MS.  notes  of  same,  pp.  92  et  seq.) 

FOSTORIA,  OHIO,  January  11,  1895. 
Mr.  HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

My  DEAR  SIR:  The  temper  of  your  note  of  the  9th  indicates  that  you  propose  to 
assail  the  late  administration  for  its  conduct  of  the  fur-seal  question. 

In  the  discharge  of  my  duty  in  the  relation  to  this  question  I  felt  that  it  was  best 
your  services  be  dispensed  with.  I  knew  that  this  act  would  result  in  your  hostility 
to  me,  and  in  due  time  I  would  be  assailed  by  you.  Now,  as  to  your  question  as  to 
the  whereabouts  of  letters  of  Capt.  Healey,  I  do  not  recall  any  conversation  with  you 
in  which  Capt.  Healey 's  name  was  used. 

If  we  had  such  a  conversation  as  you  suggest,  whatever  statement  I  made  was  truth- 
ful. I  have  no  knowledge  of  the  whereabouts  of  the  letters  of  Capt.  Healey. 

My  order  of  the  llth  of  April  authorizing  the  taking  of  seals  limited  the  catch  to  the 
"ktUable  seals,  not  to  exceed  60,000."    My  orders  to  Capt.  Williams  were  not  to  allow 
the  company  to  take  any  seal  that  was  not  in  size,  age,  and  sex  allowed  by  the  contract. 
Your?,  truly,  etc., 

CHARLES  FOSTER. 

SMITHSONIAN  INSTITUTION, 
Washington,  D.  C.,  January  19,  1895. 

DEAR  SIR:  Your  reply  of  the  llth  instant  has  only  reached  me  this  morning,  not 
reaching  Washington  until  yesterday  afternoon,  so  that  I  can  not  be  held  responsible 
for  my  seeming  delay  in  reply.  You  speak  of  the  "tone"  of  my  letter  of  the  9th 
instant.  I  wrote  you  a  business  letter,  as  you  are  a  business  man,  and  there  is  no 
other  tone  to  it. 

You  assume  that  my  purpose  is  to  "assail  the  late  administration"  for  its  conduct 
of  the  fur-seal  question.  That  action  on  my  part  was  taken  some  time  ago,  and  effec- 
tively, when  I,  like  tens  of  thousands  of  other  Republicans  in  Ohio,  in  November,  1892, 
cheerfully  helped  to  hurl  that  administration  from  its  brief  and  unpleasant  prominence. 
I  don't  purpose  now,  as  a  live  man,  to  get  up  and  kick  a  dead  antagonist,  and  you  are 

21588—13 10 


146  FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

not  fair  in  making  so  mean,  a  suggestion  to  me.     You  certainly  are  not  going  to  be 
assailed  by  me,  for  you  are  in  no  shape  to  be  assailed. 

Why  should  you  allude  to  the  canceling  of  my  commission?  I  never  alluded  to  it 
to  you  or  to  anybody  else  except  with  satisfaction.  Why,  indeed,  should  I?  You  did 
not  appoint  me;  you  had  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  it;  and  when  the  accident  of 
death  brought  you  into  a  little  spell  of  brief  authority  you  exercised  it;  I  never  objected 
and  I  never  cared,  for  this  is  a  mere  personal  matter  that  does  not  interest  anybody 
but  ourselves. 

But  the  seal  question  is  and  was  a  public  trust,  and  your  record  on  that  score  is  a 
proper  subject  for  investigation  and  fair  record. 

Now  to  business:  I  am  not  responsible  for  this  digression.  You  say  that  you  "don't 
remember  that  Healey  letter";  that  settles  it  as  far  as  this  inquiry  is  concerned;  but 
you  are  silent  as  to  my  inquiry  as  to  where  are  those  statements  of  the  employees  of  the 
N.  A.  Com.  Co.  Who  had  the  right  to  withdraw  those  papers  from  the  files  of  the 
department — these  papers  which  you  told  the  reporter  of  the  New  York  Tribune, 
May  8,  1891,  were  in  the  department  on  file,  distinctly  contradicting  my  statement  as 
to  decrease  in  seal  life?  These  papers  were,  I  suppose,  your  justification  for  that  per- 
mit to  kill  60,000  seals,  over  the  sworn  testimony  of  every  Treasury  agent  of  the  Gov- 
ernment on  the  seal  islands  against  it  at  the  time  you  gave  it  out.  I  repeat,  for  your 
own  credit,  that  these  papers  be  produced. 

Your  order  to  Maj.  Williams  put  no  restrictions  on  the  killing  of  60,000  male  seals 

over  the  age  of  1  year.     Had  that  order  not  been  canceled,  as  it  was  by  my  direct  effort, 

it, would  have  permitted  and  directed  the  most  shameful  killing  on  the  seal  islands  of 

all  the  shameful  seal  slaughter  yet  done  on  the  islands  or  in  the  waters  around  them. 

Very  truly,  yours, 

HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

Mr.  CHARLES  FOSTER, 

Fostoria,  Ohio. 

TOLEDO,  OHIO,  January  2.3,  1895. 
Mr.  HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT, 

Washington,  D.  C. 

DEAR  SIR:  Your  favor  of  the  19th  instant  reached  me  at  this  place  this  morning.  I 
have  been  troubled  with  an  inflamed  eye  and  have  been  over  here  for  treatment  sev- 
eral days.  I  wrote  as  I  did  because  it  seemed  to  me  that  your  letter  assumed  an  air  of 
arrogance  and  suspicion,  and,  I  might  add,  innuendo.  If  I  did  you  an  injustice  I  beg 
your  pardon.  I  have  no  knowledge  whatever  of  the  letters  and  papers  to  which  you 
refer.  No  paper  was  removed  from  the  files  by  my  order  or  with  my  knowledge.  If 
they  are  not  now  on  the  files  they  have  been  removed  clandestinely  or  by  order  of  some 
one  else.  My  record  in  relation  to  my  official  conduct  is  open  to  the  world;  I  did 
nothing  that  I  would  not  do  over  again  to-day  with  the  present  lights  I  have  on  the 
subject. 

Yours,  respectfully, 

CHARLES  FOSTER. 

S  M  IT  H  S  ( )  \  I A  X  T  X  STITUTI  OX. 
Washington,  D.  C..  .Innnnnj  .'a.  i$<j;>. 

DEAR  SIR:  Yours  of  the  23d  instant  was  duly  received  yesterday,  and  I  am  glad 
that  you  admit  that  my  position  of  "  assail  ing  v 'you  was  an 'assumption  on  your  part 
It  certainly  was,  and  I  ran  call  on  your  own  men,  Stanley  Brown  and  Maj .  Williams.  T< 
bear  witness  to  the  truth  of  my  statement  that  I  repeatedly  said  to  them  that  I  was  wel 
satisfied  to  be  out  of  the  association  that  they  belonged  to  in  this  fur-seal  business. 

You  know  the  act  which  sent  me  to  the  seal  islands  in  1890  was  passed  expressly 
for  that  purpose,  and  as  stated  in  both  Houses  of  Congress  when  the  subject  was  \\\ 
before  them,  it  could  not  have  been  passed  had  it  not  been  as  stated,  and  Mr.  Windom 
freely  told  me  so  before  the  bill  was  ever  introduced. 

I  knew,  as  everybody  admits  here  to-day,  that  I  was  right,  on  this  seal  business 
and  that  you  and  Mr.  Elaine  were  wrong  in  giving  that  scandalous  order  toElkinsiii 
distinct  violation  of  that  offer  made  by  Blaine  to  Her  Majesty's  Government,  Apri 
7,  1891.  *  *  *  you  issued  the  order  violating  the  faith  of  the  department  on  the 
llth  of  April,  1891.  I  exposed  that  fact  on  April  22,  ]891,  and  you  "dispensed  witl 
my  services"  on  the  25th  of  April.  1891.  Of  course  we  parted.  We  had  to  part. 
Very  truly,  etc., 

HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 
CHARLES  FOSTER, 

Fostorio,  Ohio. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  147 

The  steps  taken  by  Elliott  to  uncover  the  deceit  and  malfeasance 
of  Elaine  and  Foster  are  given  i>y  him  to  the  committee,  April  24, 
1912,  as  follows: 

MR.  ELLIOTT:  How  was  that  secret  permit  of  April  11  found  out  and  soon  made  pub- 
lic'.' By  the  rarest  of  accident.  It  was  thus: 

On  or  about  April  8,  Sir  Julian  Pauncefote  was  a  guest  at  a  certain  private  or  social 
dinner  given  to  him.  His  hostess  sat  beside  him;  during  the  progress  of  this  enter- 
tainment. Sir  Julian  remarked  to  her  that  he  believed  that  he  had  been  instrumental  at 
la?t  in  sotting  the  vexed  fur-seal  question,  and  that  Mr.  Elaine  and  he  had  just 
.1  that  no  further  slaughter  on  the  islands  or  in  the  Bering  Sea  was  to  take  place 
f<>r  ut  least  six  <>r  seven  years,  or  that  until  both  Governments  had  thoroughly  inves- 
i  the  conditions,  no  killing  was  to  be  resumed,  at  least. 

On  the  evening  of  April  11 ,  following,  this  lady  was  at  another  social  entertainment, 
and  there  overheard  the  attorney  for  the  Xorth  American  Commercial  Co.  congratu- 
late an  unknown  pers  >n  who  stood  beside  him  in  the  reception  line  over  their  success 
during  the  day  in  getting  Charles  Foster  to  give  them  a  permit  to  kill  seals;  that 
"nobody  in  Washington  knew  anything  about  it,"  and  "nobody  was  to  know  any- 
about  it"  either,  etc. 

In  a  moment  it  flashed  on  the  mind  of  this  lady  that  Sir  Julian  had  been  duped 
or  those  mer  were  in  error;  second  thought  told  her  that  the  lessees'  attorney  (Gen. 
X.  L.  Jeffries')  was  one  who  knew  his  business,  and  it  must  be  true.  She  had  heard 
me  tell  how  Mr.  Blaine  was  p*edged  to  a  close  season;  so,  on  the  following  day,  she 
called  on  me  at  the  Smithsonian  Institution  and  told  me  of  what  she  had  heard,  all 
as  above  stated. 

Astonished  and  mortified,  1  at  once  set  to  work  to  find  out  the  truth.  I  knew  that  if 
this  was  a  secret  permit  that  if  I  went  up  to  either  Mr.  Blaine  or  to  Secretary  Foster, 
they  would  not  admit  it:  it  must  be  secret,  or  it  would  be  published  and  I  would,  too, 
have  been  called  in  and  notified  of  such  an  order,  and  the  reasons  why  it  was  given  over 
the  denial  of  it  by  myself  and  all  of  the  official  reports  of  the  department's  seal  agents, 
•ngress  had  adjourned  March  4,  1891,  there  was  no  way  of  getting  a  resolution  of 
inquiry  and  the  like  introduced  and  passed.  I  therefore  asked  Congressman  William 
McKinley.  jr..  who  was  still  in  the  city,  to  call  on  Secretary  Charles  Foster  and  put 
this  inquiry  sharply  and  squarely  up  to  him. 

Major  McKinley  did  so.  On  Monday  morning — 1  think  on  or  about  April  14,  1891 — 
he  called  on  Poster  at  the  Treasury  Department.  Later,  same  day,  he  reported  to 
me  that  Foster  first  shirked  the  answer;  then  admitted  that  he  had  given  this  secret 
order  on  April  11,  and  had  given  it  after  a  full  understanding  with  Mr.  Elaine,  who 
on  that  day  had  inf  a-med  him  that  there  was  no  hope  of  getting  any  modus  vivendi 
from  'ireat* Britain;  that  "the  British  were  ugly."  etc. 

This  report  of  Maj.  McKinley  aroused  my  suspicions  as  to  the  status  in  so  far  as 
Great  Britain's  part  in  the  business  was  concerned.  I  knew  all  the  time  that  the 
Canadians  opposed  my  plan;  but  I  had  taken  two  letters  over  to  Secretary  Blaine  in 
January  and  February,  1891,  written  to  me  from  London,  and  by  a  gentleman  who 
was  very  close  to  Lord  Salisbury.  These  letters  assured  me  that  Salisbury  was  in 
favor  of  my  modus  vivendi.  (I  gave  those  letters  to  Mr.  Blaine  and  he  kept  them.) 

If  anything  was  to  be  done  to  stop  this  infamous  killing  permit  thus  started  under 
cover,  it  must  be  done  at  once  and  before  the  lessees'  vessel  was  loaded  in  San  Francisco 
and  cleared  for  the  islands.  I  knew  that  such  a  permit  would  be  flashed  instantly 
over  to  them  there,  and  that  this  work  of  getting  ready  for  the  season's  killing  was 
surely  under  way. 

On  the  22d  of  April,  1891,  I  learned  directly  and  positively  that  the  British  premier 
was  not  "ugly,"  was  not  aware  of  the  fact  that  he  was  secretly  misrepresented  here 
by  our  own  high  officialism  in  charge  of  this  fur  seal  question.  Knowing  this,  then, 
I  took  the  only  step  I  could  take  as  a  good  citizen  to  stop  this  infamous  game  as  played 
between  the  lessees  and  Secretary  Charles  Foster,  using  Secretary  Blaine  as  their 
shield.  1  wrote  a  brief,  terse  story  of  it,  and  signed  my  name;  then  addressed  it  to 
the  New  York  Evening  Post  on  the  evening  of  this  day,  April  22.  That  letter  was 
published  in  that  paper  Friday,  April  24,  1891.  It  stirred  official  Washington  from 
top  to  bottom  in  the  State  and  Treasury  Departments.  This  exposure  of  that  secret 
killing  order  went  all  over  the  United  States  instantly  in  the  press  dispatches,  and  it 
caught  the  eye  of  President  Harrison,  who  at  this  time  was  on  a  railroad-touring  circuit 
of  the  Pacific  Coast  and  somewhere  in  California.  He  vetoed  this  infamous  killing 
order  by  wire,  either  from  Los  Angeles  or  San  Francisco,  on  May  3,  1891  (or  from  some 
point  in  California).  This  was  published  in  the  New  York  Herald  May  4,  1891. 
(Hearing  No.  10,  p.  664,  Apr.  24,  1912,  Ho.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


148  FUR-SEAL   HEKD   OF   ALASKA. 

The  manner  in  which  he  finally  reached  Sir  Julian  and  so  learned 
of  the  deceit  of  Blaine  and  was  thus  enabled  to  expose  the  jobbers 
and  stop  the  slaughter  that  season  of  1891,  as  the  secret  permit  of 
April  11  ordered,  is  set  forth  by  Elliott  in  terrible  words  of  truth  to 
the  rotten  officials  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  thus: 

The  CHAIRMAN.  All  right  then.  I  suppose  it  is  the  sense  of  the  committee  that  the 
statement  shall  go  in? 

Mr.  PATTON.  I  have  no  objection. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Then  it  is  so  ordered. 

WASHIXCTOX,  Mmj  12,  1903. 

DEAR  COL.  HAY:  I  do  not  know  why  the  inclosed  is  sent  to  me,  except  for  my 
sympathy  with  Elliott  in  the  matter  of  the  Alaskan  seals.  Nor  do  I  know  what  to 
do  with  it  except  to  place  it  at  your  disposition  to  decide  if  there  is  wisdom  in  his 
suggestion. 

Very  faithfully  yours,  K  A  SSON. 

(Given  to  me  by  Mr.  Hay,  in  Department  of  State,  June  20,  1903,  1 1.40  a.  m.— 
H.  W.  E.) 

I,  ARE  WOOD,  OHIO,   May  10,  1903. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  KASSON:  In  packing  away  a  lot  of  papers  to-day  I  came  upon  those 
minutes  of  the  interview  which  took  place  between  Sir  Julian  and  myself  in  April, 
1891.  You  suggested  that  I  put  them  into  writing  after  I  had  recited  them  to  you 
in  your  residence,  December  10,  1901.  I  inclose  a  ropy  of  them. 

Heading  them  over,  the  thought  occurs  to  me  that  the  desperate  condition  of  affairs 
on  the  seal  islands  to-day  warrants  Sir  Michael  in  doing  exactly  what  Sir  Julian  did 
in  1891.  He  can  override  the  Canadians  and  agree  upon  a  modus  vivendi  for  1904, 
just  as  Sir  Julian  did  for  1891. 

Sir  Julian  took  this  action  solely  on  the  strength  of  his  belief  in  the  truth  of  my 
representation  and  report  of  1890.  Sir  Michael  can  have  not  only  all  of  this  ground, 
but  the  important  additional  data  which  I  have  placed  in  Mr.  Hay's  hands. 

I  Lad  to  go  as  a  stranger,  personally,  to  Sir  Julian  in  1891,  on  account  of  Mr.  Elaine's 
" infirmity"  of  purpose.  Mr.  Hay 'can  go  to  Sir  Michael  with  vastly  greater  effect 
and  tact  than  I  went  to  Sir  Julian.  He  can  take  these  authentic  records,  illustrations, 
facts,  and  figures  which  I  have  given  him  recently  and  lay  them  with  great  emphasis 
before  the  British  ambassador. 

Something  must  be  done  this  summer  and  before  Congress  meets.  Otherwise,  if 
naught  comes  from  the  State  Department,  the  pending  seal  bill,  now  lying  in  the 
Senate  Foreign  Relations  Committee,  will  be  passed  in  short  order,  as  a  measure 
absolutely  necessary  to  save  the  fur  seal  species  of  Alaska  from  complete  extinction. 

It  would  be  a  great  feather  in  Mr.  Hay's  cap,  and  also  for  that  of  Sir  Michael,  if  such 
a  modus  for  1904  was  agreed  upon  as  was  that  of  1891. 

I  have  never  said  a  word  to  Mr.  Hay  about  this  particular  matter  and  the  securing 
in  1891  of  that  modus  vivendi  which  I  urged  in  my  report  of  1890.     I  do  not  know 
whether  I  ought  to.     If  you  think  it  proper  and  will  serve  as  a  useful  side  light, 
venture  to  ask  that  you  see  Mr.  Hay  and  talk  it  over  with  him,  for,  really,  the  more 
think  of  it  the  more  I  am  inclined  to  believe  that  Sir  Michael  ran  easily  do  agaii 
what  his  distinguished  predecessor  did  in  the  premises,  and  for  which  action  he 
highly  rewarded  by  his  Government,  in  spite  of  the  bitter  opposition  of  the  Canadians 

With  every  regard  for  you, 

I  am,  faithfully,  your  friend,  HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

Hon.  JOHN  A.  KASSON,  Washington,  I).  C. 

[Inclosure.f 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  December  10,  1901. 
During  a  call  made  upon  Mr.  John  A.  Kasson.  this  morning  and  for  the  purpose  of 
understanding  fully  what  the  High  Joint  Commission  did  about  the  fur  seal  questioi 
before  it  was  strangled  by  the  boundary  dispute  February  22,  1899,  Mr.  Kasson  saic 
to  me  that  I  ought  to  reduce  to  writing  that  account  which  I  had  given  him  of  the 
adoption  of  my  modus  vivendi  of  1891-1893;  this  account  to  be  sealed  and  not  brokei 
during  the  life  of  the  British  ambassador,  the  other  party,  James  G.  Blame,  bein< 
dead. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  149 

I  therefore  make  the  following  statement,  which  will  constitute  a  complete  sequel 
to  my  diary  notes  of  what  took  place  between  Mr.  Elaine  and  myself  prior  to  my 
interview  with  Sir  Julian. 

Wednesduv,  April  '2'2.  Isiil :  After  due  reflection  and  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  I  had 
never  met  the  British  minister,  I  resolved  this  morning  to  call  upon  him  and  put 
the  question  directly  to  him  whether  or  no  he  had  refused  to  entertain  any  proposi- 
tion for  a  modus  vivendi  in  Bering  Sea  for  the  protection  of  the  fur  seals,  as  he  was 
charged  with  doing  hy  Charles  Foster  on  the  13th  instant  (see  preceding  memoranda). 

I  took  i  he  Connecticut  Avenue  street  car  on  F,  corner  Tenth  NW.,  and  entered 
the  British  Legation  door  at  half  past  10  o'clock  in  the  morning;  the  servant  took  my 
card,  left  me  standing  in  the  hall,  returned  in  a  few  minutes  saying  that  Sir  Julian 
was  dressing  and  would  sec  me  when  he  came  down.  I  was  ushered  into  the  office, 
which  opens  directly  from  the  hall,  opposite  the  drawing-room.  I  had  penciled  on 
my  card  the  words  ••concerning  the  fur  seals  of  Alaska,"  so  that  he  might  know  what 
I  wa^  after. 

I  was  not  alone  more  than  10  or  15  minutes  before  Sir  Julian  came  into  the  room, 
and  he  greeted  me  with  the  greatest  courtesy,  saying  that  he  had  heard  a  great  deal 
about  me  and  that  he  had  asked  Secretary  Elaine  to  introduce  me  several- times. 

I  replied,  saying  that  I  too  had  often  asked  Mr.  Elaine  to  present  me,  but  that  he 
had  not  done  so. 

"  I  have  called  on  you,  Sir  Julian,  this  morning  on  my  own  responsibility.  I  do 
not  come  from  Mr.  Elaine.  I  have  come  to  make  an  inquiry  which  may  be  improper; 
if  it  is,  pardon  me  and  give  no  answer,  but  I  want  to  inform  you  that  an  order  to  kill 
60,000  fur  seals  was  given  to  the  lessees  of  the  seal  islands  on  the  llth  instant;  that 
this  order  to  kill  was  based  upon  the  refusal  of  your  Government  to  unite  with  mine 
in  a  modus  vivendi  whereby  all  killing  on  land  and  in  the  sea  is  to  be  suspended 
during  the  coming  season  in  Eering  S<?a.  If  this  refusal  of  your  Government  to  act 
with  mine  is  authentic,  then  I  want  to  say  to  you  from  my  full  knowledge  and  under- 
standing of  the  question  that  killing  60,000  young  male  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands 
this  summer  means  the  absolute  extermination  of  that  life  up  there,  and  the  shame 
of  this  doing  is  upon  your  Government." 

Sir  Julian's  manner  instantly  changed  as  I  spoke;  his  expression  became  one  of 
intense  surprise;  he  answered  in  language  substantially  as  follows,  walking  up  and 
down  the  end  of  the  room  where  we  were  standing,  alternately  facing  and  partly 
turning  from  me: 

"It  is  rot  true:  my  Government  has  been  trying  to  get  Mr.  Elaine  to  agree  upon 
some  such  plan  ever 'since  the  opening  of  March,  and  it  was  not  until  the  7th  day  of 
this  month  that  he  agreed  to  it,  and  I  am  expecting  to  hear  by  return  post  of  the 
acceptance  by  my  Government  of  the  modus  vivendi.  I  posted  the  offer  of  Mr.  Elaine 
on  the  same  day 'and  immediately  after  he  made  it  to  me.  Really,  my  dear  sir,  you 
surprise  me.  I  do  not  believe  that  Mr.  Elaine  knows  what  he  does  want.  I  have 
been  having  quite  a  time  trying  to  find  out." 

We  then  talked  a  few  minutes  about  the  condition  of  the  seals,  the  attitude  of  the 
Canadians,  and  of  our  lessees.  He  said  that  it  was  a  case  in  which  the  testimony  was 
exceedingly  conflicting,  and  that  under  the  circumstances  the  only  humane  and  wise 
thing  to  do' was  to  stop  the  killing  for  a  season  at  least  and  look  into  the  matter  during 
the  meantime.  He  said  that  as  far  as  he  was  concerned  his  sympathy  was  for  the 
seals  and  he  would  give  them  the  benefit  of  every  doubt. 

I  then  took  my  departure,  having  been  with  him  about  half  an  hour. 

HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

TiiK  LESSEES,  D.  O.  MILLS,  UNITED  STATES  SENATOR  ELKINS,  AND 
ISAAC  LIEBES,  PARTICIPATE  IN  THE  PROFITS  OF  THIS  ILLEGAL 
KILLING  OF  SEALS  AND  HAVE  FULL  KNOWLEDGE  OF  THAT  WORK. 

The  interest  which  these  lessees  had  in  getting  those  343,365  seal 
skins  is  clearly  established  by  an  exhibit  of  their  profit  in  the  business, 
as  given  ante,  page  -  — . 

The  question  at  once  arises.  Since  these  men  have  made  a  net  gain 
for  themselves  of  $5,000,000,  have  they  made  that  gain  honestly  '. 

The  answer,  based  upon  the  following  facts  of  record,  is  that  they 
have  not:  they  have  violated  the  law  and  regulations  of  the  Govern- 
ment, in  order  to  get  those  seals;  and,  in  so  doing  they  have  wrought 


150  FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 

great  injury  to  the  fur-seal  herd  to  the  end  of  practically  destroying 
its  value,  for  the  next  10  years.  To  gain  that  end  of  violating  these 
rules  and  regulations  of  the  Government,  these  men,  Liebes,  Tevis, 
Mills,  and  Elkins,  have  successfully  combined  with  certain  agents 
of  the  Government  in  charge  ot  the  seal  islands,  as  will  appear  by 
the  following: 

II.  Isaac  and  Herman  Liebes,  Lloyd  Tevis,  D.  O.  Mills  (lessees), 
on  the  12th  day  of  March,  1890,  combined  with  Stephen  B.  Elkins 
and  George  R.  Tingle  to  deceive  William  Windom,  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  in  order  to  gain  from  him  the  lease  of  the  seal  islands  of 
Alaska,  said  lease  running  from  May  1,  1890,  to  May.  1910  (20  years). 

They  were  successful,  and  so  secured  the  lease  (full  details  of  which 
were  given  to  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee,  January  14,  1907,  by 
Henry  W.  Elliott,  and  renewed  by  him  to  the  House  Committee  on 
Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  May  15, 
1911). 

III.  On  the  5th  day  of  April,  1891,  Charles  J.  Goff,  United  States 
special  agent  in  charge  of  the  seal  islands,  was  removed  therefrom, 
through  the  combined  efforts  of   said   lessees   and   Charles   Foster, 
Secretary  of  the  Treasurer,  said  Goff  having  stopped  said  lessees  in 
their  illegal  and  injurious  killing  of  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands, 
June  20,   1890,   and   having   recommended  that  all  killing  by  said 
lessees  be  suspended  entirely  for  an  indefiinite  term  of  years  tor  the 
public  good. 

Said  lessees  had  one  W.  H.  Williams  appointed  in  Goff's  place 
April  5,  1891,  and  with  Charles  Foster's  own  selection  also,  Joseph 
Stanley  Brown  was  appointed  April  23,  1891,  to  visit  the  islands  as 
his  own  personal  representative  "to  get  the  facts,"  etc. 

These  men  reached  the  island  June  10,  1891;  the  international 
modus  vivendi  of  June  15,  1891,  was  anticipated  by  them,  in  their 
instructions  of  May  27,  1891,  which  were  not  to  permit  the  lessees 
to  take  more  than  7,500  seals.  These  orders  were  duly  entered  in 
the  official  journal  on  the  islands,  June  13,  1891.  In  spite  of  this 
specific  order  not  to  permit  the  killing  of  more  than  7,500  seals  on 
both  islands  during  the  entire  season  ol  1891,  yet  these  lessees  so 
influenced  these  agents.  Williams  and  Brown,  as  to  actually  kill  and 
secure  the  skins  of  13,695  seals  by  August  11  following,  and  have 
the  same  regularly  endorsed  by  them. 

IV.  On  June  9,  1892,  said  Joseph  Stanley  Brown,  returned  to  the 
seal  islands  as  the  ''chief  special  agent  in  charge'7;  and,  on  July  8, 
1892,   he   ordered  that   the   entire  supervision   and   control  of  the 
Government  over  the  lessees  on  the  killing  grounds  be  given  to  th( 
lessees;  thus,   as  the  following  certified   cvpy  cf  the  official  orden 
reads  on  the  official  journal  of   the   United  States  Treasury  agent, 
St.  Pauls  Island  (p.  2). 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA.  151 

FRIDAY,  JULY  8,  1892. 

The  entire  control  and  management  of  the  killing  grounds  and  killing  of  the  seals 
were  given  to  Mr.  Fowler,  of  the  N.  A.  C.  Co.,  by  order  of  Mr.  J.  Stanley  Brown,  agent 
n  charge,  and  Assistant  Agent  Murray  was  ordered  to  count  the  seals.1 

V.  Having;  thus  given  the  entire  control  of  the  Government  agents 
over  the  killing  of  seals  by  the  lessees  to  said  lessees  themselves  on 
the  6th  day  of  June,  1894,  Mr.  J.  Stanley-Brown  came  back  to  these 
seal  islands  as  the  paid  superintendent  of  the  lessees  and  took  charge 
of  their  interests  on  the  killing  grounds.     The  following  official  entry 
declares  Mr.  Brown's  association  with  the   lessees   (p.   222,  official 
journal  of  the  Tinted  States  Treasury  agent  in  charge  of  St.  Paul 
Island) : 

WEDNESDAY,  JUNE  6,  1894. 

Si.-'umcr  I.cikiiu  of  the  Xorih  American  Commercial  Co.  arrived,  having  on  board 
,T.  I>.  Crowlcy  and  wii>\  as  chief  agent,  and  Mr.  Judge  and  wife,  also  Mr.  Brown, 
superintendent  of  North  American  Commercial  Co.,  Mr.  Chichester,  and  Mr.  Arm- 
strong. 

VI.  On  May  14,  1896,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  John  G.  Carlisle 
issued  an  order  to  the  agents  in  charge  of  the  seal  islands  of  Alaska, 
which  specifically  directed  them  to  prohibit  the  lessees  from  "killing 
yearlings  or  seals  having  skins  weighing  less  than  six  pounds,"  thus: 

[P.  14)  Oifk-ial  record  or  journal  of  the  chief  special  agent  in  charge  of  the  seal  islands,  St.  Paul  Island. 
This  letter  is  entered  by  J.  B.  Crowley  (p.  14)  in  the  journal  of  his  office  Tuesday,  June  17,  189(>,  and 
before  the  killing  was  begun.) 

TREASURY  DEPARTMENT, 
OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY, 
Washington,  D.  C.,  May  14,  1896. 

Mr.  J.  B.  CROWLEY.  , 

>>oV//  Ayr  lit  in  charge,  of  the  Seal  Islands, 

rare  of  ,\f>rth  American  Commercial  Co., 

San  Francisco,  Cal. 

SIR:  I  inclose  herewith  for  your  information  copy  of  a  letter,  dated  the  33th  instant, 
addressed  by  me  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 'and  approved  by  him,  in  relation  to 
the  taking  of  fur  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  and  determining  the  quota  of  such  seals 
to  be  allowed  the  North  American  Commercial  Co.  during  the  season  of  1896.  You 
are  instructed  to  permit  said  company  to  take  on  the  islands  during  the  season  of  1896 
all  killoble  male  seals  over  and  above  the  number  which  in  your  opinion  is  sufficient 
to  fertilize  the  female  seals,  the  number  taken  not  to  exceed  in  any  event  30,000 
seals.  The  killing  of  yearlings  and  seals  whose  skins  weigh  les?  than  six  pounds  is 
prohibited. 

Hi-sped  fully,  yours, 

C.  S.  HAMLIN.  Acting  Secretary. 
True  ropy. 
At  tost : 

A.  F.  GALLAGHER. 

1  Mr.  J.  Stanley  Brown  appears  in  1894,  on  the  seal  islands, as  the  "superintendent  of  the  N.  A.C.Co.' 
•  ill  useful  in  this  conspiracy  as  late  as  1009.  in  the  attempt  then  made  by  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  to 
renew  the  Elkins -lease,  as  the  following  official  letter  attests: 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 
Washington,  December  16,  1909. 
The  COMMISSIONER: 

The  Washington  Star  of  December  10  last  announced  that  the  Campfire  Club,  of  New  York,  had  inaugu- 
rated a  campaign  to  save  the  fur-seal  herd  through  legislation  designed  to  prevent  the  re-leasing  of  the 
sealing  right .  t  ho  cessation  of  all  killing  on  the  islands  for  10  years  except  for  natives'  food  and  to  secure  the 
opening  of  negotiations  with  Great  Britain  to  revise  the  regulations  of  the  Paris  tribunal.  As  the  result 
of  this  movement,  on  December  7  three  resolutions  were  introduced  by  Senator  Dixon,  of  Montana,  one 
of  which  embodies  the  provisions  before  mentioned,  the  other  two  calling  for  the  publication  of  fur-seal 
correspondence  and  reports  since  1904. 

As  t  he  object  of  this  movement  is  at  variance  with  the  program  of  this  bureau  and  of  the  reccmmerdations 
of  the  advisory  fur-seal  board,  notably  in  the  plan  to  prevent  killing  and  the  renewal  of  the  seal-island 
lease,  tha^idvisability  is  suggested  of  having  Messrs.  Townsend,  Lucas,  and  Stanley  Brown  use  their 
in'l  n  nJWith  s'lch  members  of  the  Campfire  Club  as  they  may  be  acquainted  with*  with  the  object  to 
correctly^iforming  the  club  as  to  the  exact  present  status  of  the  seal  quest  ion  and  of  securing  its  cooperation 
to  effect  the  adoption  of  the  measures  advocated  by  this  bureau. 
The  attached  letter  is  prepared,  having  in  view  the  object  slated. 

BARTON  W.  EVERMANN. 


152  FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 

In  spite  of  this  distinct  prohibition  of  the  killing  of  ''yearlings" 
by  the  Secretary,  yet  the  records  of  the  London  sales  show  that  the 
lessees  took  some  8,000  "yearling"  or  ''eyeplaster"  skins  in  open, 
flagrant  violation  of  these  specific  rules  of  the  department  in  getting 
this  quota  of  30,000  seals  allowed  them  subject  to  those  orders. 

The  part  which  Mr.  Joseph  Stanley-Brown  took  in  loading  those  small 
yearling  skins,  8,000  of  them,  in  order  to  weigh  them  in  as  ''not 
under  six  pounds,  and  as  2-year-old  male  seals"  after  Secretary 
Carlisle's  orders  were  posted,  may  be  easily  understood.  It  needs  no 
description. 

Dr.  Jordan,  in  his  final  report,  declares  that  he  is  under  great  obliga- 
tions to  Mr.  Brown  for  the  valuable  aid  given  him  (Jordan)  while 
studying  the  seal  herd. 


EXHIBIT  IV.  THE  EXPERTS  QUOTED  BY  SECRETARY  NAGEL 
AS  HIS  ADVISERS  IN  KILLING  FUR  SEALS  IN  VIOLATION 
OF  LAW,  ALL  DENY  THEIR  RESPONSIBILITY,  AND  ALL 
DENY  ANY  PERSONAL  KNOWLEDGE  AS  TO  WHETHER  THAT 
KILLING  WAS  LEGAL  OR  ILLEGAL,  AS  DONE  BY  NAGEL. 

On  April  26,  1909,  Secretary  Charles  Xagel  wa  notified  in  specific 
detail  that  his  agents,  under  his  directions,  were  killing  seals  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands  in  open,  flagrant  violation  of  the  law  and  regulations. 
On  May  is,  1910,  the  executive  committee  of  the  Camp  Fire  Club  of 
America  addressed  a  stirring  letter  of  protest  to  the  Secretary  of 
Commerce  and  Labor  against  any  further  killing  of  seals  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands  for  commercial  purposes,  and  the  Secretary  was 
warned  that  if  any  seals  were  killed  by  him  it  would  be  a  breach  of 
the  faith  reposed  in  him  by  the  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation  of 
National  Resources.  This  being  ignored,  on  May  127,  1910,  the 
executive  committee  of  this  Camp  Fire  Club  addressed  a  second  letter 
recording  its  final  protest,  and  warning  the  Secretary  of  Commerce 
and  Labor  not  to  make  a  false  step  in  the  matter.  This  warning  was 
unheeded,  and  under  orders  from  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and 
Labor,  dated  May  9,  1910,  12,920  fur  seals  were  slaughtered  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands  in  June  and  July,  1910. 

On  December  16,  1910,  the  skins  of  those  seals  thus  slaughtered  and 
taken  by  the  order  of  Secretary  Charles  Xagel,  as  above  stated,  were 
sold  in  the  London  fur  market,  and  the  official  records  of  the  sale 
revealed  the  fact  that  7,733  of  those  skins  were  classified  as  ''small 
pups"  and  "extra  small  pups."  The  London  measurements  which 
declare  this  classification  show  that  these  skins  were  taken  in  violation 
of  the  law  and  regulations. 

On  January  9,  1911,  Senator  Knute  Nelson  introduced  Senate  bill 
No.  9959,  entitled  "An  act  to  protect  the  seal  fisheries  of  Alaska,  and 
for  other  purposes."  This  bill  was  introduced  at  the  request  of  the 
Camp  Fire  Club  of  America  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  by  manda- 
tory law  the  killing  of  any  fur  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  for  com- 
mercial purposes  during  the  next  five  years. 

On  January  10  the  chairman  of  the  Senate  committee  submitted 
a  copy  of  this  bill  thus  introduced  by  Senator  Nelson,  to  Secretary 
Charles  Xagel,  and  asked  him  to  express  his  opinion  officially  to  tlie 
committee  upon  its  merits,  alluding  also  to  the  protests  against  his 
killing  in  1910  and  thereto  recorded,  and  made  directly  against  the 
action  of  his  agents,  killing  senl>  under  his  direction,  in  violation 
of  the  law  and  regulations.  On  January  14,  1911,  Secretary  Charles 
addressed  the  following  letter  to  Chairman  Dixon: 


DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY, 

Washington,  January  14,  1911. 

MY  DEAR  SENATOR:  I  have  your  communication  of  the  12th  instant  inclosing 
Senate  bill  Xo.  9959  to  amend  an  act  entitled  "An  act  to  protect  the  seal  fisheries  of 
Alaska,  and  for  other  purposes." 

The  essential  purpose  of  this  bill  I  take  to  be  a  suspension  of  seal  killing  for  a  period 
of  five  years  from  and  after  the  1st  day  of  May,  1911.  Since  the  hearing  before  your 

153 


154  FUE-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

committee  last  year  I  have  had  some  occasion  to  consider  this  question  with  the 
result  that  the  impressions  then  expressed  have,  if  anything,  been  strengthened. 

Under  existing  conditions  I  can  not  believe  that  the  seal  herds  would  be  in  any 
sense  conserved  by  suspending  the  killing  of  male  seals  in  the  manner  in  which  it  is 
now  being  done.  So  long  as  pelagic  sealing  is  continued  there  does  not  appear  to  me 
to  be  even  room  for  discussion.  I  believe  it  can  be  demonstrated  that  the  number 
of  female  seals  killed  by  the  pelagic  sealers  substantially  equals  the  number  of  male 
seals  killed  by  the  Government.  If  that  be  true,  one  and  perhaps  the  chief  argument 
which  has  been  advanced  would  seem  to  be  without  foundation. 

However,  if  pelagic  sealing  were  discontinued  and  all  the  female  seals  were  abso- 
lutely protected,  I  still  believe  that  it  would  be  perfectly  safe,  and  in  a  measure 
necessary,  in  so  far  as  the  conservation  of  the  herd  is  concerned,  to  kill  a  certain  per- 
centage of  male  seals.  Of  course  my  personal  judgment  is  without  value.  I  am 
relying  upon  the  advice  of  experts  who  have  been  appointed  to  inquire  and  report 
and  who  have  given  the  department  the  benefit  of  their  opinion. 

I  gather  that  a  further  ground  has  been  assigned  for  the  discontinuance  of  seal  killing, 
namely,  that  such  discontinuance  would  be  received  by  foreign  countries  as  proof  of 
our  disinterestedness  and  that  such  a  course  would  serve  to  promote  the  consumma- 
tion of  treaties  to  prohibit  pelagic  sealing.  If  this  were  so,  I  should,  of  course,  advo- 
cate the  discontinuance,  but  I  have  no  intimation  from  the  State  Department  that 
such  a  course  on  our  part  would  have  the  slightest  bearing  upon  pending  negotiations. 
I  can  not  undertake  to  speak  upon  this  phase  of  the  question,  but  no  doubt  that 
information  can  be  readily  obtained  from  the  State  Department. 

I  am  glad  to  say  that  the  results  of  the  first  year's  experience  under  the  law  enacted 
last  year  are  now  at  hand.  Compared  with  the  amounts  received  under  the  contract 
system  the  showing  is,  I  think,  a  very  satisfactory  one.  At  the  same  time  I  would  not 
be  understood  as  saying  that  a  gain  in  the  receipt  of  a  few  hundred  thousand  dollars 
ought  to  be  conclusive  in  determining  the  Government's  policy.  On  the  contrary, 
I  am  of  the  opinion  that  the  primary  consideration  to  have  in  mind  is  one  of  con- 
servation, namely,  the  preservation  of  the  herds.  If  I  could  believe  that  the  policy 
which  the  Government  now  pursues  in  any  sense  endangers  the  herds,  I  should  advo- 
cate a  change.  My  recommendation  with  respect  to  the  bill  now  pending  is  based 
upon  the  opinion  that  the  Government  is  now  killing  only  such  male  seals  as  may  be 
regarded  as  surplus,  and  that  the  preservation  of  the  herds  is  not  in  any  degree  affected 
by  this  policy. 

If  it  is  proposed  to  have  a  hearing  upon  this  bill,  I  respectfully  ask  that  as  much 
notice  as  possible  be  given,  so  that  I  may  make  sure  to  have  present  those  representa- 
tives of  the  bureau  and  such  members  of  the  boards  and  commissions  as  are  more 
especially  conversant  with  the  question. 
Very  sincerely,  yours, 

(Signed)  CHARLES  NAGEL. 

Hon.  JOSEPH  M.  DIXON, 

United  States  Senate. 

In  this  letter  above  cited,  Secretary  Nagel  says  that  he  himself 
possesses  no  knowledge  as  to  the  work  being  done  on  the  islands,  but 
that  he  issued  his  orders  and  relied  upon  the  judgment  of  experts  duly 
qualified  and  appointed,  who  gave  him  their  advice.  On  June  9, 
1911,  Fish  Commissioner  Bowers,  representing  the  Secretary  of 
Commerce  and  Labor,  appeared  before  the  House  Committee  on 
Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  and  pre- 
sented to  the  Committee  the  names  of  those  experts  upon  whom  the 
department  relied  as  its  authority  for  killing  small  seals  in  violation  of 
law  and  regulations. 

Mr.  Bowers  testified  as  follows  (June  9,  1911,  Hearing  No.  2,  p.  109) : 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Yes,  sir.  I  ought  to  have  another  statement  here  that  I  would  like 
to  have  offered,  but  I  am  not  able  to  find  it  at  present.  If  the  gentleman  will  permit, 
I  wish  to  say  that  these  regulations  are  in  conformity  to  recommendations  made  by  this 
advisory  board. 

Mr.  CABLE.  Give  the  names  of  the  members  of  the  advisory  board. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  The  members  of  the  Fur-Seal  Board  and  of  the  Advisory  Board, 
Fur-Seal  Service,  are  as  follows: 

"In  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  general  matters  regarding  the  fur  seals  are  considered 
by  a  fur-seal  board,  consisting  of  the  following: 

"Dr.  Barton  Warren  Eyermann  (chairman),  who  is  chief  of  the  Alaska  Fisheries 
Service  and  who  has  been  in  Alaska  a  number  of  times.  He  was  a  member  of  the  Fur- 


FUR-SEAL  HEED   OF  ALASKA.  155 

Seal  Commission  of  1892,  when  he  spent  six  months  in  the  North  Pacific  and  Bering 
Sea  and  on  the  seal  islands  studying  the  fur  seal.1 

"The  Advisory  Board,  Fur-Seal  Service,  consists  of  the  following: 

"Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan,  president  of  Stanford  University,  who  was  chairman  of  the 
International  Fur-Seal  Commissions  of  1896  and  1897,  appointed  in  pursuance  of  the 
treaty  of  February  29,  1892,  and  whose  published  report  in  four  volumes  is  the  most 
comprehensive,  thorough,  and  valuable  treatise  that  has  ever  been  published  on  all 
matters  pertaining  to  the 'fur  seal  and  the  seal  islands.  Dr.  Jordan  is  the  most  distin- 
guished and  best-known  naturalist  in  the  world . 

"Dr.  Leonhard  Stejneger,  head  curator  of  biology,  United  States  National  Museum, 
for  two  years  resident  on  the  Russian  seal  islands,  member  of  the  Fur-Seal  Commissions 
of  1896  and  1897,  as  a  member  of  which  he  visited  and  studied  all  the  fur-seal  rookeries 
of  Alaska,  Russia,  and  Japan.  His  report  on  the  Russian  seal  islands  is  the  most  critical 
and  thoughtful  that  has  been  written.2 

"Dr.  C.  Hart  Merriam,  until  recently  Chief  of  the  Biological  Survey,  member  of  the 
Fur-Seal  Commission  of  1890,  and  the  greatest  living  authority  on  mammals.3 

"Dr.  Frederic  A.  Lucas,  director  of  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History, 
member  of  the  Fur-Seal  Commissions  of  1896  and  1897,  and  one  of  the  keenest,  most 
discerning  and  best-known  naturalists.4 

"Dr.  Charles  H.  Townsend,  director  of  the  New  York  Aquarium,  for  many  years 
naturalist  on  the  fisheries  steamer  Albatross,  member  of  the  Fur-Seal  Commissions  of 
1896  and  1897,  and  distinguished  as  a  naturalist  and  field  investigator.  Dr.  Townsend 
made  a  special  study  extending  over  many  years  of  our  fur  seals  and  pelagic  sealing.5 

These  experts  thus  certified  to  the  committee  as  the  authority  upon 
whom  the  department  relied  for  this  killing,  above  stated,  in  violation 
of  law  and  regulations,  were  Messrs.  Merriam,  Stejneger,  Lucas, 
Townsend,  Evermann,  and  Lembkey. 

Thereupon  the  committee  summoned  those  experts  to  appear  and 
testify  as  to  their  knowledge  of  this  killing  as  above  stated.  The  fol- 
lowing analysis  of  their  testimony  declares  the  fact  that  not  one  of 
those  experts  was  above  quoted  by  Secretary  Nagel,  January  14, 
1911,  and  June  9,  1911,  except  Lembkey  had  any  knowledge  what- 
ever of  this  killing  as  ordered  by  Secretary  Nagel.  They  also  declared 
complete  ignorance  of  the  work  as  it  has  been  done  under  orders  of 
Secretary  Nagel;  and  still  further  they  all  declared,  except  Lembkey, 
that  they,  of  their  own  personal  knowledge,  can  not  pa.-s  any  opinion 
upon  this  work  as  to  whether  it  was  legally  or  illegally  done.  This 
testimony  follows,  being  taken  from  the  sworn  statements  of  those 

fentlemen  and  paralleled  with  that  of  their  own  writings  and  the 
epositions  of  their  associates  in  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  " Advisory 
board  fur-seal  service,"  to  wit: 

I. 

The  sworn  statements  of  Dr.  C.  Hart  Merriam,  who  is  one  of  the  experts  cited  to  the 
United' States  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation  of  National  Resources,  January  14, 1911, 
and  to  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
June  9,  1911,  by  Secretary  Charles  Nagel  as  his  authority  for  killing  seals  in  violation  of 
the  law  and  the  regulations,  to  ivit: 

Mr.  BOWERS.  The  members  of  the  fur-seal  board  and  of  the  advisory  board,  fur-seal 
service,  are  as  follows: 

Dr.  C.  Hart  Merriam,  for  many  years  chief  of  the  Bureau  of  Biological  Survey, 
and  perhaps  the  ablest  living  mammalogist  of  the  world. 

Dr.  Merriam  was  one  of  the  two  special  commissioners  sent  to  the  seal  islands  in 
1891  by  the  United  States  Government  to  study,  in  conjunction  with  commissioners 
from  Great  Britain  and  Canada,  the  island  life  of  the  seals.  (Hearing  No.  2,  p.  109, 
June  9,  1911,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  &  L.) 

1  Kvermann  testified  that  his  "experience"  on  the  islands  was  just  nine  days  in  1S95. 

2  Stejneger  has  testified  that  his  "experience  "on  the  islands  was  just  10  days,  in  1 

ified  that  his  "experience"  on  the  islands  was  just  10  days,  in  1891. 

ashas  testified  that  his  "experience"  on  the  islands  was  just  92  days,  or  "about  so  long,"  in  two  years. 
5  Townsend  ha-  testified  {hat  his  "experience"  on  !he  islands  was  jusl  212  days,  or  "about  so  long,."  in  10 
years. 


156 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


THE    DEADLY    PARALLEL. 


.  Secretary  Nagel  don't  know 
any  thing  himself — he  relies  wholly 
upon  the  advice  of  experts  duly 
appointed. 

The  letter  of  Secretary  Charles  Nagel  in 
answer  to  inquiry  by  Committee  on 
Conservation  of  National  Resources  as 
to  his  ' '  authority  "  for  his  work  of  killing 
fur  seals  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  in  vio~- 
lation  of  law  and  rules,  and  who  puts 
this  killing  as  done  squarely  upon  Jor- 
dan, Stejneger,  Merriam,  et  al. 

[Copy.] 

DEPARTMENT  or  COMMERCE  AND  LA  BUI;. 
OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY, 
Washington,  January  14,  1911. 

MY  DEAR  SENATOR:  I  have  your  com- 
munication of  the  12th  instant  inclosing 
Senate  bill  No.  9959  to  amend  an  act  en- 
titled ''An  act  to  protect  the  seal  fisheries 
of  Alaska,  and  for  other  purposes." 

The  essential  purpose  of  this  bill  I  take 
to  be  a  suspension  of  seal  killing  for  a 
period  of  five  years  from  and  after  the  1st 
of  May,  1911.  Since  the  hearing  before 
your  committee  last  year  I  have  had  some 
occasion  to  consider  this  question  with 
the  result  that  the  impressions  then  ex- 
pressed have,  if  anything,  been  strength- 
ened. 

Of  course  my  personal  j  udgment  is  with- 
out value.  I  am  relying  upon  the  advice 
of  experts  who  have  been  appointed  to  in- 
quire and  report  and  who  have  given  the 
department  the  benefit  of  their  opinion. 
*  *  *  * 

If  it  is  proposed  to  have  a  hearing  upon 
this  bill,  I  respectfully  ask  that  as  much 
notice  as  possible  be  given,  so  that  I  may 
make  sure  to  have  present  those  represent- 
atives of  tl:  e  bureau  and  such  members  of 
the  boards  and  commissions  as  are  more 
especially  conversant  with  the  question. 
Very  sincerely,  yours, 
(Signed)        *  CHARLES  NAGEL. 

Hon.  JOSEPH  M.  DIXON, 

United  States  Senate. 

The  fur-seal  "experts"  alluded  to  by 
Secretary  Nagel  in  the  above  letter  are  all 
"officially"  and  modestly  presented, 
June  9,  1911,  to  the  House  Committee  on 
Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce and  Labor,  as  follows  (see  p.  109. 
Hearing  No.  2)  (Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  914- 
918,  July  25,  1912.): 


But  Merriam  swears  that  he 
has  not  advised  Secretary  Nagel, 
and  does  not  know  anything 
about  it,  either. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Well,  how  long  have 
you  been  on  the  advisory  board? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  Since  the  beginning.  I 
do  not  remember  the  date;  but  I  have 
been  absent  from  the  city  during  a  num- 
ber of  the  sittings  of  that  committee,  as  I 
am  engaged  in  field  work  in  the  West  at 
least  half  of  every  year,  and  therefore  have 
not  been  in  Washington  at  the  time  most 
of  these  meetings  were  held. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Were  you  at  the  meet- 
ing of  the  advisory  board  that  the  previous 
witness  referred  to  in  his  testimony? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  do  not  remember  any 
such  meeting. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Are  you  a  member  of 
the  board  now? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  Yes. 
*  *  *  * 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  One  question  more.  I 
understood  you  to  say  that  you  had  not 
been  in  consultation  with  Mr.  Bowers 
when  he  issued  his  orders  for  killing  13,000 
seals  in  1910? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  do  not  think  I  was 
present  at  any  conference  when  that  mat- 
ter was  up. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  no  further  ques- 
tions to  ask  at  this  time. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  there  anything  else 
that  you  wish  to  state,  Doctor? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  No.  (Hearing  No.  11, 
May  16, 1912,  pp.  692,  699.) 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  wish  to  ask  Dr.  Merriam 
some  questions.  Dr.  Merriam,  when  did 
you  arrive  on  the  seal  islands  for  the  first 
time,  in  your  life? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  In  the  summer  of  1891. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  was  that  date — 
about  what  time? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  On  the  morning  of  July 
28. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  did  you  leave? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  left  on  August  10. 
(Hearing  No.  11,  May  16,  1912,  p.  695.) 


FUK-SEAL  HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


157 


United  States  Fish  Commis- 
sioner Bowers  declares  that  Dr. 
Merriam  is  one  of  his  authorities 
who  approves  the  killing  on  the 
islands — 

Mr.  BOWERS.  The  members  of  the  fur- 
seal  board  and  of  the  ad visory  board, 
fur-seal  service,  are  as  follows: 

FUR-SEAL  BOARD, 

BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES. 
In   the   Bureau   of   Fisheries,   general 
matters  regarding  the  fur  seals  are  con- 
sidered by  a  fur-seal  board,  consisting  of 
the  following: 

Dr.  C.  Hart  Merriam.  until  recently 
chief  of  the  Biological  Survey,  member 
of  the  Fur  Seal  Commission  of  ]890,  and 

the  greatest  living  authoritv  on  mammals. 
*  *  *"  * 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  had  in  mind  getting 
the  best  talent  I  could:  I  expected 
probable  criticism. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  I  am  not  criticizing 
you  now. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  endeavored  to  get  the 
best  talent  it  was  possible  to  get  and  to 
act  upon  their  advice  in  this  fur-seal 
matter.  (Hearing  No.  2,  p.  109,  June  9, 
1911,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  &  Labor.) 


Lucas  says  that  "Merriam  and 
himself,"  have  "observed,"  and 
"have  exact  knowledge,"  etc. 

AMERICAN  MUSEUM 

OF  NATURAL  HISTORY, 
New  York,  February  24,  1912. 

DEAR  SIR:  Absence  from  the  city  has 
delayed  my  replying  to  your  favor  of  Feb- 
ruary 21,  which  I  am  very  glad  to  receive. 

Let  me  say.  first,  that  my  exact  knowl- 
edge in  regard  to  the  killing  of  seals  under 
2  years  of  age  during  the  years  1909  and 
1910  must,  like  that  of  others  who  did  not 
see  the  actual  killing,  be  based  on  the  pub- 
lished statement  of  their  weights.  In  ad- 
dition, however,  I  have  my  own  experi- 
ence to  aid  in  translating  these  weights. 
The  advisory  board  recommended  that  no 
sealskins  under  5  pounds  in  weight  be 
taken,  this  being  the  average  weight  of  a  2- 
year-old  skin.  The  weight  given  by  Elli- 
ott in  1875  was  (see  postscript)  5£  pounds, 
but  this  was  based  on  an  average  of  only 
10  skins.  There  is  a  bare  possibility  that 


Dr.  Merriam  denies  having  any 
knowledge  of  what  Bowers  has 
been  doing — he  would  "not 
kill  yearlings  under  any  circum- 
stances." 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Then,  in  case  anyone  in 
the  House  of  Representatives  has  used 
your  name  as  a  person  who  would  be  op-* 
posed  to  the  killing  on  the  islands  they 
were  wrong  about  your  position? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  They  were  wrong.  I 
have  never  taken  any  such  position.  I 
have  always  held  the  contrary.  I  have 
always  stated,  since  the  first  time  I  went 
there,  that  conservative  killing  on  the 
islands  was  a  benefit  to  the  herd  and  not 
an  injury,  but  I  should  not  allow  the 
killing  of  yearlings  under  any  circum- 
stances, and  I  should  not  kill  more  than 
75  per  cent  of  the  young  on  land  at  any 
one  time.  I  would  be  sure  to  leave  more 
than  enough  for  possible  contingencies. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Have  you  made  any 
personal  investigation  as  to  whether  the 
Government  has  killed  excessively? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  know  nothing  about 

that  from  personal  knowledge. 

*  *  *  * 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  One  question  more.  I 
understood  you  to  say  that  you  had  not 
been  in  consultation  with  Mr.  Bowers 
when  he  issued  his  orders  for  killing 
13.000  seals  in  1910? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  do  not  think  I  was 
present  at  any  conference  when  that 
matter  was  up.  (Hearing  No.  11,  pp. 
694,  695,  699,  May  4,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  &  Labor.) 

Dr.  Merriam  swears  that  he  has 
no  exact  knowledge,  and  has  not 
"observed"  with  Lucas. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Doctor,  while  you  were 
on  the  island  did  you  ascertain  the  length 
and  weight  of  a  yearling  seal? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Do  you  know  anything 
about  the  length  and  the  weight  of  a  year- 
ling sealskin? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  Nothing. 

Mr.  ELMOTT.  Did  you  make  any  meas- 
urements up  there? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  do  not  remember  off- 
hand. I  examined  a  great  many  pup 
seals  for  sex. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  did  not  measure  the 
yearlings,  Doctor? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  measured  or  at  least 
weighed  some  of  the  seals,  but  I  do  not 
remember  offhand . 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  published  any 
record  of  it? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  think  not. 


158 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


these  might  be  short  3-year-olds,  but  I 
will  let  the  matter  stand  as  stated.  Ac- 
cording to  the  observations  of  Dr.  Merriam 
and  myself  there  is  about  20  per  cent  vari- 
ation from  the  average  either  way,  so  that 
some  2-year-old  sealskins  would  weigh  but 
4  pounds  and  others  would  weigh  6  pounds. 
The  island  weights  of  the  skins  in  1909 
show  that  a  few  were  taken  under  5 
pounds,  these  being  small  2-year-olds;  and 
it  is,  of  course,  impossible  to  judge  within 
a  half  a  pound  of  the  weight  of  a  skin  while 
it  is  on  a  seal.  The  accuracy  of  these 
weights  is  corroborated  by  the  London 
weights  given.  Please  bear  in  mind  that 
the  terms  ' '  large  pups, "  "  middling  pups, ' ' 
etc.,  given  in  the  London  sales  table,  re- 
fer to  weights  and  not  to  ages.  Conse- 
quently I  haven't  the  slightest  hesitancy 
in  taking  my  affidavit  that  undersized 
skins  have  not  been  systematically  taken. 

The  yearling  seals  are  very  readily  dis- 
tinguished from  all  others,  as  I  hope  I 
may  have  the  pleasure  of  pointing  out  to 
you  some  day  either  here  or  in  Brooklyn, 
and  their  skins  would  weigh  from  3J  to  4£ 
pounds. 

#*•##• 

Pardon  me  for  troubling  you  with  a 
number  of  explanatory  details,  but  I  wish 
above  all  things  to  make  it  clear  that  I  am 
not  speaking  by  hearsay,  or  making  state- 
ments without  foundation,  but  that  I  am 
writing  of  matters  with  which  I  have  a 
direct  acquaintance. 

Faithfully,  yours, 

F.  A.  LUCAS. 

Hon.  EDWARD  W.  TOWNSEND, 
Committee  on  the  Library, 
House  of  Representatives. 

(Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  947,  948,  July  27, 
1912.) 

Just  before  his  cross-examina- 
tion, he  saw  seal  bulls  fighting 
fiercely  on  rookery. 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  do  not  know  the  relative 
importance  of  the  three  natural  causes 
of  destruction  of  young  pups.  The  three 
causes  that  seem  to  be  the  most  potent, 
after  doing  away,  of  course,  with  polugic 
sealing,  are  (1)  the  destruction  of  pups  by 
the  killer  whale  in  the  fall,  when  the  killer 
whales  circle  around  the  islands  close  to 
shore  and  eat  large  numbers  of  pups;  (2) 
the  destruction  by  trampling  on  I  lie  rook- 
eries, especially  during  the  battles  be- 
tween the  bulls;  and  (3)  the  destruction 
caused  by  an  intestinal  worm,  which  I 
think  of  much  less  consequence  than  at 
first  supposed,  though  a  number  do  die 
from  the  hookworm  disease.  These  three 
causes  kill  a  large  number  of  pups  each 
year — pups  of  the  season. 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No,  and  therefore  you 
made  no  record  that  we  could  get  hold  of 
to-day? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  doubt  if  I  measured 
any  of  the  2-year-old  seals. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  never  been  able 
find  it. 

(HearingNo.il,  p.  699,  May  16,  1912. 


But,  after  his  cross-examina- 
tion, he  never  saw  bulls  fight- 
ing— just  effects  of  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  see  any  fighting 
of  the  bulls? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  saw  no  general  fighting 
of  the  old  bulls  on  the  breeding  rookeries. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  right. 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  But  I  saw  much  evi- 
dence of  the  fighting  by  lacerated  bulls. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  do  you  not  know  it  is 
a  matter  of  official  record  that  this  fighting 
takes  place  many  weeks  before  the  fe- 
males arrive? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  It  mainly  takes  place 
early  in  the  season. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  right. 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  But  is  not  entirely  fin- 
ished before  the  females  arrive. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  But  you  never  saw  the 
finish,  did  you? 


FUR-SEAL    HERD    OF    ALASKA. 


159 


Mi  GUIRE.    VCM  ure  nut  pn-pa-'d  t«» 
testily  as  to  the  relative  destrurti\ 

I>r.  MKRKIAM.  \i>;  I  do  not  know;  it 
\vo;;l<!  !>.'  only  u  'ju 

Mr.  McGuiRE  \V!i:ii  -.voiild  be  your 
.  if  you  have  any  u" 

I>  MKKKIAM.  My  ^IK.-S  would  be  that 
th«-  number  killed  by  kill  -r  \vhales  and  by 
trampling  on  the  rookeries,  assuming  the 
•ny  full  1  do  not  mean  at 
the  present  time,  when  the  rookeries  are 
BO  empty— would  be  about  even. 

My.  Mc(iriRK.    1  - 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  The  killing  by  trampling 
and  the  killing  by  the  "killer  whales 
would  be  about  even,  and  the  deaths 
produced  by  internal  parasites  would  be 
very  much  fewer  than  half  of  those  from 
either  of  the  other  causes. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Well,  what  steps  would 
you  take  to  reduce  the  killing  by  tram- 
pling? Suppose  you  were  right  in*  charge 
of  that  herd,  what  would  you  do? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  The  only  recommenda- 
tion that  has  occurred  to  me  is  to  lessen 
the  number  of  superfluous  males;  in  other 
words,  to  decrease  the  righting. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  You  would  do  that  by 
diminish  ing 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  By  thinning  out  the 
superfluous  males  by  killing  many  of 
them  before  they  are  old  enough  to  go  on 
the  rookeries,  so  that  the  righting  would 
not  be  so  severe,  thus  lessening  the  num- 
ber of  young  killed  by  trampling.  The 
battles  are  very  fierce,  as  everyone  knows 
who  witnesses  them. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  In  proportion,  then 
down  to  a  certain  number  of  males,  as  the 
number  of  males  are  diminished,  the 
losses  from  trampling  are  less? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  That  seems  rational. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Yes;  that  seems  rational. 
What  number  of  females  would  you  leave 
for  each  male?  What  do  you  think  would 
be  a  fair  estimate?  (Hearing  No.  11,  pp. 
694,  696;  May  4,  1912.) 

MiTriam  tolls  the  committee 
how  he  would  manage  so  as  to 
kill  75  JHT  cent  of  the  seals  only. 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  do  not  wish  to  have  you 
do  it.  either.  Doctor.  Doctor,  you  said 
vou  could  "kill  down  to  75  per  cent." 
ilow  do  yon  know  when  you  are  "killing 
down  to  75  per  cent  "—will  you  tell  the 
committee  how  you  arrive  at  that  con- 
clusion? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  suppose  if  there  are  a 
hundred  nonbreeding  male  seals  on  the 
hauling  grounds,  and  75  per  cent  of  those 
are  driven  off.  leaving  25.  and  the  75  are 
killed,  we  would  have  reason  to  suspect 
that  we  had  killed  75  per  cent  of  the  non- 


Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  am  not  clear  eno'".rh 
about  that  to  be  willing  to  make  a  positive 
statement. 

M  •.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  se<>  any  "tram- 
pling of  pups?  " 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  sa\v  trampling  of  pups, 
and  I  saw  a  male  seal  on  a  belated  harem 
seize  a  female  s<>al  fmm  another  harem, 
and  the  bull  of  the  harem  to  whom  the  fe- 
male belonged  attacked  the  first  one  very 
savagely;  that  I  sav;.  but  it  vas  like  the 
case  of* the  young  seal,  it  was  a  belated 
case.  Those  incidents  were  mostly  over 
before  the  time  of  my  visii . 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  exactly  as  I 
understand  it.  You  got  there  too  late  to 
see  the  breeding.  Dr.  Merriam,  did  you 
see  any  "cows  killed  and  torn  to  pieces" 
by  these  bulls? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  saw  a  cow  torn,  as  I 
have  just  stated,  but  not  killed.  Wh ether 
she  died  afterwards  or  not  I  do  not  know. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  published  that  in  full 
detail  in  1874.  Did  I  not  publish  the  fact 
at  the  same  time  that  all  this  "fighting" 
takes  place  from  six  to  two  weeks  before 
the  general,  full  arrival  of  the  cows,  ex- 
cept in  sporadic  cases?  (See  p.  42,  Spl. 
Bulletin  176,  U.  S.  Com.  Fish  and  Fish- 
eries, 1882.) 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  witness  may  not 
know  what  you  wrote. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  He  is  a  student  of  natural 
history  and  a  specialist  on  seals,  and  he 
certainly  read  that  monograph  of  mine 
over  and  over  again.  You  will  admit  that, 
will  you  not,  Doctor? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  certainly  have  not 
read  it  for  more  than  20  years. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  read  it  when  you 
went  up  there,  all  right. 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  probably  read  it  imme- 
diately on  my  return. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  Dr.  Lucas,  did  you 
see  up  there  a  pup  trampled  to  death  by 
a  bull? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No. 

Elliott  tells  the  committee 
that  no  man  can  kill  down  to  75 
per  cent  or  95  per  cent,  and  know 
when  he  has  done  so. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  make  your  state- 
ment to  the  committee,  and  we  can  get 
along  better  in  that  way. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  They  can  not  and  do  not 
know  how  to  save  that  "5  per  cent";  I 
will  show  you  exactly  how  they  do  not 
save  that  ':5  per  cent"  and  can  not  pos- 
sibly save  it;  no  living  man  can. 

The  CHAIRMAN  .  You  give  us  your  state- 
ment. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  will.  When  they  go 
out  to  drive  up  seals  they  drive  up  what 
they  find  on  a  given  hauling  ground .  Say 


160 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


breeding  seals  present  on  that  hauling 
ground  at  that  time. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes.  Then,  the  next 
day — right  there,  that  is  all  right  to  begin 
with;  that  is  the  first  day  of  the  driving. 
The  next  day  you  go  out  and  you  find 
another  hundred. 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  Yes;  we  might  find 
twice  as  many  as  on  the  first  day.  or  only 
half  as  many,  as  these  nonbreeding  seals 
go  back  and  forth  in  the  ocean,  which  the 
old  male  seals  do  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  count  your  second 
drive  of  100  seals,  Doctor,  and  you  take 
another  "75  per  cent";  how  near  are  you 
to  the  fact  that  you  have  not  killed  the 
seals  that  you  saved  the  first  day?  How 
do  you  know  that  you  have  spared  that 
"25  per  cent "  when  you  killed  them  again 
the  next  day  you  drove  and  then  again 
took  "75  per  cent"  of  them? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  would  not  do  all  the 
driving  from  one  rookery.  There  are  a 
large  number  of  rookeries  on  the  island. 
which  could  be  driven  in  succession. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Of  course,  you  can  not  do 
it  from  one  ' ' rooker\  . "  I  did  not  say  you 
did,  but  you  drive  from  each  and  every 
hauling  ground  over  and  over  again  dur- 
ing the  season — from  six  to  ten  or  more 
times.  (Hearing  No.  11,  p.  697.  May  4. 
1912.) 


there  are  100  on  that  given  hauling  ground 
they  kill  95  of  them  and  allow  5  to  go,  and 
that  is  5  per  cent  saved.  That  point  is 
clear,  is  it  not?  Then  the  5  that  are  saved 
go  back  to  the  sea,  and  they  go  back  to  the 
hauling  grounds,  perhaps,  the  same  day, 
or  even  within  a  half  hour  they  may  return 
to  the  hauling  grounds  from  whence  they 
were  driven.  Then  in  two  or  three  days 
the  native  "drivers"  go  out  there  again, 
and  these  men  drive  up  another  100,  and 
they  kill  them  right  down  to  5  again, 
without  knowing  how  many  of  that  5  were 
driven  over  the  second  time;  so  they  have 
counted  up  as  saving  "10"  when  they 
have  not  saved  "  5. "  They  go  back  again 
to  that  hauling  ground  six  or  seven  times 
before  the  killing  season  is  over  and  drive 
up  100  each  time  in  the  same  way,  and 
before  they  get  through  they  do  not  faintly 
know  how  many  of  that  original  "5 ''  have 
been  saved.  While  they  theoretically 
have  saved  "30,"  yet  they  may  not  have 
even  saved  "5  "  and  no  living  man  knows. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  The  only  answer  to 
that  is  that  it  is  not  true. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Why  is  it  not  true? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  They  have  never 
killed  up  to  95  per  cent. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  do  you  know? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  do  not  know  it,  but 
I  simply  have  the  information  from  the 
agents'  reports. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  agents'  reports  show 
it  is  pretty  close  killing,  and  that  they, 
too.  do  not  know.  I  have  followed  and 
.studied  hundreds  of  seal  drives,  and  I  do 
know  what  a  man  can  do  in  fact  and  what 
he  can  not  do  in  the  premises.  (Hearing 
No.  14,  p.  934,  July  25,  1912.) 


II. 

The  sworn  statements  of  Dr.  Leonhard  Stejneger,  who  is  one  of  the  experts  cited  to  the  United 
States  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation  of  National  Resources,  January  14,  1911, 
and  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  June  9, 
1911,  by  Secretary  Charles  Nagel,  as  his  authority  for  killing  seals  in  violation  of  the 
laws  and  regulations,  to  wit: 


Mr.  BOWERS. 

•*     *     # 


*  The  advisory  board,  fur-seal  service,  consists  of  the  follow- 
ing: *  *  Dr.  Leonhard  Stejneger,  head  curator  of  biology,  United  States 
National  Museum,  for  two  years  resident  on  the  Russian  seal  islands,  member  of  the 
Fur  Seal  Commissions  of  1896  and  1897,  as  a  member  of  which  he  visited  and  studied 
all  the  fur-seal  rookeries  of  Alaska,  Russia,  and  Japan.  His  report  on  the  Russian  seal 
islands  is  the  most  critical  and  thoughtful  that  has  been  written.  *  *  *  (Hearing 
No.  2,  p.  109,  June  9,  1911.) 


FUB-SEAL   HEED  OF  ALASKA. 


161 


THE    DEADLY    PARALLEL. 


Stejneger  swears  that  pups  are 
trampled  to  death  (1912): 

INVESTIGATION  OF  FUR-SEAL  INDUSTRY 
OF  ALASKA. 

COMMITTEE  ON  KXI'KNDITURES  IN  THE 
DKPARTMKNT  OF  COMMERCE  AND 
I.AHOR,  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTA- 
TIVES, 

Saturday,  May  4,  1912. 
The  commhu'e  met  at  10  o'clock  a.  m., 
Hon.    John    H.    Rothermel    (chairman) 
presiding. 

Present:  Messrs.  Young,  McGillicuddy, 
and  McGuire. 

STATEMENT    OF    LEONHARD    STEJNEGER. 

LEONHARD  STEJNEGER,  having  been 
duly  sworn,  was  examined,  and  testified 
as  follows : 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  In  that  case,  I  should 
say  I  first  came  to  the  Commander  Islands 
in  1882  and  stayed  until  the  fall  of  1883, 
remaining  the  winter s 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Continuously? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Yes.  I  saw  the  whole 
business  from  beginning  to  end  during 
two  seasons.  I  mapped  the  rookeries, 
and  I  have  made  a  very  elaborate  report 
on  that.  This  [handing'book  to  the  chair- 
man] gives  all  the  data. 

In  1896  I  was  appointed  a  member  of 
the  Fur  Seal  Investigation  Commission, 
of  which  Dr.  Jordan  was  the  chairman. 
\\V  went  up  early  in  the  season  and  I 
stayed  on  the  Pribilof  Islands  for  10  days 
with  the  other  members  of  the  commis- 
sion and  went  all  over  the  rookeries  at 
that  time,  and  did  part  of  the  counting  of 
the  rookeries  on  the  American  islands, 
and  then  went  over  to  the  Commander 
Islands  again  and  inspected  the  rookeries 
there,  mapped  the  distribution  of  the 
seals  on  the  rookeries  then  as  compared 
to  what  they  were  in  1882,  1883,  and  1895. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Now,  your  testimony 
with  respect  to  the  killing  of  the  pups  by 
the  fighting  of  battles  by  the  males  is 
based  upon  not  only  your  general  informa- 
tion, that  you  have  been  able  to  obtain  in 
general  way,  but  as  well  upon  two  years' 
actual  stay  upon  seal  islands? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  And  upon  your  actual 
observation? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Surveys  of  the  rook- 
eries. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  You  have  personally 
observed  those  conditions,  have  you? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Yes,  sir. 


Stejneger  denies  that  pups  are 
trampled  to  death  (1898): 

It  is  certainly  very  significant  that  on 
Bering  Island  over  a  thousand  pups  are 
yearly  driven  to  the  killing  ground, 
there  to  be  released  without  any  visible 
harm  coming  to  them  worth  mentioning. 
If  these  newly-born  seals  can  stand  to  be 
driven  three-fourths  of  a  mile  from 
Kishotchnoye  and  to  be  repeatedly 
trampled  upon  by  the  larger  ones  piling 
up  four  high,  or  more,  on  top  of  them, 
it  stands  to  reason  that  the  vigorous 
holustioki,  or  even  the  females,  as  a 
whole  can  suffer  but  little  injury  from  the 
.same  cause.  (Fur-Seal  Investigations, 
Part  IV,  1898,  p.  101,  by  Leonhard 
Stejneger.1) 


1  NOTK. 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  should  think  that  if  they  were  left  and  had  been  left  for  some  time  by  themselves  it 
would  be  the  fighting  of  the  males. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  The  fighting  of  the  males  and  trampling  of  the  pups? 

Dr.  STEJHEGER.  Fighting  of  the  males  and  trampling  of  the  pups.  (Hearing  No.  11,  p.  702,  May  4,  1912, 
H.  Com:  Exp.  Dept.  C.  and  L.) 

21588—13 11 


162 


FUR-SEAL    HERD    OF   ALASKA. 


Stejneger  denies  the  quotation :       ButStejnc 


arris  eoi 


rectly  quoted. 


TOMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 
DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND 
LABOR,  HOUSE  OF  K  EPRFSKN  TA- 
TTY ES, 

Saturday,  May  4.  191%. 
The  committee  met  at  10  o'clock  a.  iu., 
Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman;  pre- 
siding. 

Present:  Messrs.  Young,  MeGillicuddy, 
and  McGuire. 


Astounding  as  it  appears,  there  can  be- 
but  little  doubt  that  the  single  old  bull 
had  served  the  520  females  on  this  rookery 
(Poludinnoye)  and  was,  moreover,  in  tit 
condition  to  keep  the  youngei  bull  at  a 
respectful  distance  as  late  in  the  season  as 
July  30.  (Fur  Seal  Investigations,  Pt. 
IV,  189S,  ]>.  108.  by  Leonhard  Stejneger.) 


STATEMENT   OF   LEONHARD    8TEJNEG 

LEONHARD  STEJNEC.KI;.    having 
duly  sworn,  was  examined,  and  tcslitif. i 
as  follows: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Drive  all  classes — bulls, 
cows,  and  pups  up  together? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Gathering  in  every 
seal  that  they  could  lay  their  hands  on  in 
the  Russian  Islands,  so  as  not  to  let  pelagic 
sealers  get  hold  of  them. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Since  you  have  suggested 
that  remarkable  order  of  work  on  the  Rus- 
sian Islands,  you  are  quoted  by  one  of 
your  associates  recently,  before  another 
committee,  as  saying  that  one  bull  seal 
was  sufficient  to  serve  250  or  500  females. 
Are  you  really  properly  quoted  there? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  am  certainly  mis- 
quoted. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  There  ;s  no  such  quo- 
tation. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  it  here  published. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  ask  Mr.  Elliott  to 
produce  it.  Now  is  the  time  to  pro- 
duce it. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  have  it  with 
you? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes;  it  is  here,  and  I  will 
put  the  whole  thing  in  right  now.  I  have 
got  it  right  here.  I  will  put  it  right  in, 
and  have  it  printed. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  insist  it  be  put  in 
now.  We  want  it  now. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  It  will  go  light  in.  Now, 
I  have  got  it  right  here. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Take  your  time  and  do 
it.  Dr.  Evermann  wants  it  produced, 
and  I  think  it  ought  to  be  placed  in  the 
record  if  it  can  be  found. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  If  he  has  it.  the  thing 
to  do  is  to  show  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Here  it  is.  [Exhibiting 
paper  to  the  committee.]  Now,  right 
here,  in  the  Seattle  Sunday  Times,  issue 
of  October  11.  1908,  I  state  to  Mr.  Frank 
H.  Hitchcock,  who  has  quoted  from  Dr. 
Jordan's  letter  to  him.  dated  January  12, 
1904  (Swarthmore  College,  Pennsylvania), 
[reading] : 

"Now,  most  all  of  these  men  know  bet- 
ter, but  are  silent  in  the  shadow  of  Jordan. 
Even  Stejneger,  with  his  fairy  tale  of  two 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


163 


bulls  being  enough  to  serve  500  cows 
(which  Jordan  so  gravely  quotes  hereto 
you  with  all  <>i  the  pompous  gravity  and 
true  coarseness  of  ignoiance) — even  he  can 
not  find  a  trace  to-day  of  either  those  'two 
l)ii lls'  or  '500  cows'  which  he  so  specifi- 
callyjdescribee  on  Copper  Island  in  1896 — 
good  reason — they  are  extinct.  That 

giance  has  ended  forever  over  there, 
ut  Jordan  does  not  even  know  it  ai  this 
late  hour." 

COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES  IN  THE 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Saturday,  May  4,  1912. 

The  committee  met  at  10  o'clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  John  H.  Rothennel  (chairman) 
presiding. 

Present:  Messrs.  Young,  McGillicuddy,  and  McGuire. 

STATEMENT    OF    LEONHARD    STEJXEGER. 

LEONHARD  STEJXEGER.  having  been  duly  sworn,  was  examined,  and  testified  as 
follows: 

THE    DEADLY    PARALLEL    ON    STEJXEGER   AND    EVERMANN. 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Drive  all  classes — bulls, 
cows,  and  pups  up  together? 

Dr.  STEJXEGER.  Gathering  in  even- 
seal  that  they  could  lay  their  hands  on  in 
the  Russian  Islands. '  so  as  not  to  let- 
pelagic  sealers  get  hold  of  them. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Since  you  have  sug- 
gested that  remarkable  order  of  work  on 
the  Russian  Islands,  you  are  quoted  by 
one  of  your  associates  recently,  before  an- 
other committee,  as  saying  that  one  bull 
seal  was  sufficient  to  serve  250  or  500  fe- 
males. Are  you  really  properly  quoted 
there? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  am  certainly  mis- 
quoted. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  There  is  no  such 
quotation. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  it  here  published. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  ask  Mr.  Elliott  to 
produce  it.  Now  is  the  time  to  produce 
it. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  have  it  with 
you? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes:  it  is  here,  and  I  will 
put  the  whole  thing  in  right  now.  I  have 
got  it  right  here.  I  will  put  it  right  in. 
and  have  it  printed. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  insist  it  bo  put  in 
njow.  We  want  it  now. 

Mr.  EI.I.IOTT.  It  will  go  right  in.  Now. 
I  have  got  it  right  here. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Take  your  time  and 
do  it.  Dr.  Evermann  wants  it  produced. 
and  I  think  it  ought  to  be  placed  in  the 
record  if  it  can  be  found. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  If  he  has  it.  the  thing 
to  do  is  to  show  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Here  it  is.  [Exhibiting 
paper  to  the  committee.]  Now.  right 
here,  in  the  Seattle  Sunday  Time.-,  k-w 


Astounding  as  it  appears,  there  can  be 
but  little  doubt  that  the  single  old  bull 
had  served  the  526  females  on  this  rookery 
(Poludinnoye),  and  moreover,  was  in  fit 
condition  to  keep  the  younger  bull  at  a 
respectiul  distance  as  late  in  the  season 
as  July  30.  (Fur  Seal  Investigations, 
Pt.  IV,  1898,  p.  168,  Leonhard  Stejneger. ) 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  But  permit  me  to 
quote  the  words  of  several  distinguished 
zoologists  who  have  studied  the  fur  seal 
on  the  land  and  in  the  sea.  *  *  * 

First.  I  want  to  quote  from  Dr.  David 
Starr  Jordan,  president  of  Stanford  Uni- 
versity. Therefore  only  1  bull 
in  30  i*?  absolutely  necessary  under  pres- 
ent conditions.  That  this  limit  could  be 
materially  lowered  without  positive  dan- 
ger to  the  herd  is  conclusively  shown  by 
the  *  *  '  observations  of  the  past 
three  years,  as  detailed  by  Dr.  Stejneger, 
show  that  a  male  fur  seal  is  capable  of 
attending  to  the  wants  of  between  100  and 
200  cows.  *  *  *  (Hearings  on  H.  R. 
1  »;r,: i.  Jan.  4,  1912.  pp.  129,  130,  H.  Com. 
Foreign  Affairs.) 


164 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


of  October  11,  1908,  I  state  to  Mr.  Frank 
H.  Hitchcock,  who  has  quoted  from  Dr. 
Jordan's  letter  to  him,  dated  January  12, 
1904  (Swarthmore  College,  Pennsylvania), 
[reading] : 

"Now,  most  all  of  these  men  know 
better,  but  are  silent  in  the  shadow  of 
Jordan.  Even  Stejneger,  with  his  fairy 
tale  of  2  bulls  being  enough  to  serve  500 
cows  (which  Jordan  so  gravely  quotes  here 
to  you  with  all  of  the  pompous  gravity  and 
true  coarseness  of  ignorance) — even  he 
can  not  find  a  trace  to-day  of  cither  those 
'two  bulls'  or  '500  cows'  which  he  so 
specifically  describes  on  Copper  Island 
in  1896 — good  reason — they  are  extinct. 
That  ghost  dance  has  ended  forever  over 
there.  But  Jordan  does  not  even  know 
it  at  this  late  hour." 

Stejneger  swears  he  did  not  ivc- 
ommend  renewal  of  the  lease: 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Are  you  a  member  of 
the  advisory  board  on  fur  seals? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Yes,  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  say  you  have  been 
together  once  or  twice.  When  was  that? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  The  first  time,  I  think, 
was  just  before  the  expiration  of  the  old 
lease,  and  when  the  board  recommended 
that  the  Government  take  over  the  sealing 
business  and  not  let  the  islands  to  any 
company  to  exploit. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  say  that  was  done 
for  the  purpose  of  discussing  whether  there 
should  be  another  lease  or  not? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Yes.  We  were  asked 
our  opinion  whether  that  would  be  the 
better  procedure  for  the  Government,  to 
undertake  the  sealing  itself  or  to  lease  it 
to  a  company.  That  is  my  recollection. 
I  want  you  to  understand  that  so  far  as  my 
understanding  goes,  these  were  the  meet- 
ings in  which  I  have  taken  part.  There 
may  have  been  others,  for  all  I  know. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  At  this  meeting,  when 
it  was  discussed  as  to  whether  there  should 
be  a  re-leasing  of  the  islands,  what  was 
your  decision  in  the  matter? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Our  recommendation 
was  that  the  Government  take  over  the 
whole  business. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  not  lease  the 
islands  any  longer? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  And  not  lease  the  is- 
lands any  longer  to  any  company. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  you  say  that  you 
met  at  the  suggestion  of  the  Secretary  of 
Commerce  and  Labor? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  That  is  my  recollec- 
lection.  We  were  appointed  or  we  got  a 
letter  from  the  Secretary  of  Commerce 
and  Labor  asking  us  to  serve  in  an  advi- 
sory capacity  to  him.  We  determined 


Sworn  proof  submitted  that  he 
did  recommend  renewal  of  lease: 

Exhibit  No.  3,  being  a  "draft  of  new 
lease  for  seal  islands "  handed  to  George 
M.  Bowers,  December  15,  1909,  by  Barton 
W.  Evermann  and  said  draft  "is  prepared 
by  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries"  ana  "by  its 
advisory  board  on  fur-seal  service,  in  com- 
pliance with  your  request"  (i.  e.,  George 
M.  Bowers),  as  follows: 

EXHIBIT  No.  3. 

DEPARTMENT  OF 
COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 
Washington,  December  15,  1909. 
Mr.  COMMISSIONER:  There    is    handed 

n  here  with  for  your  consideration  a 
t  of  lease  of  the  seal  islands.  This  has 
been  prepared  by  Mr.  Lembkey  and  my- 
self in  compliance  with  your  request.  We 
have  endeavored  to  make  the  form  of  the 
lease  agree  with  the  recommendations  re- 
cently made  by  the  advisory  board,  fur- 
seal  service,  in  conference  with  the  fur- 
seal  board.  For  your  convenience  a  num- 
ber of  references  and  citations  have  been 
indicated.  It  is  believed  that  an  exam- 
ination of  this  tentative  draft  will  enable 
the  Secretary  to  arrive  at  the  exact  form 
desired. 

Respectfully, 

BARTON  W.  EVERMANN. 
Assistant  in  charge  Scientific  Inquiry. 

The  lease  should  be  renewed.  It  is 
foolish  to  abolish  killing  on  land  while 
seals  are  being  killed  in  the  water.  Ces- 
sation of  killing  on  land  means  encourage- 
ment to  pelagic  sealing.  Should  pelagic 
or  sea  killing  be  abolished,  it  might  be 
well  to  have  a  closed  season  on  land  as 
well,  to  allow  the  herd  to  recuperate. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


165 


nothing;  vre  just  recommended.  \\V 
gave  our  opinion  on  certain  points  ajid 
recommended  it;  that  is  all. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  you  put  that  in 
writing  and  send  it  to  the  Secretary? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  think  there  was  un- 
doubtedly a  letter  at  that  time. 

The  CHAIRMAN'.  Was  it  your  opinion 
that  the  further  leasing  of  the  islands 
would  not  be  for  the  best  interests  of  the 
Government? 

Dr.  STEJXEGER.  Most  decidedly. 
(Hearing  X...  11.  pp.  675,  676,  May  4. 
1912.) 


Stejneger  says  Hitchcock 
agreed  with  him  in  opposition  to 
the  "Hitchcock  rules"  issue: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  One  more  question:  When 
Chief  Clerk  Hitchcock,  of  the  Department 
of  ( 'ommerce  and  Labor.  wa-<  preparing 
the  "Hitchcock  rules."  putting  a  check 
on  this  killing  of  all  those  seal<  which  you 


DEPARTMENT  OF 
<  "MMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 
Washington,  December  16,  1909. 
The  COMMISSIONER: 

The  Washington  Star  of  December  10 
last  announced  that  the  Campfire  Club, 
of  New  York,  had  inaugurated  a  cam- 
paign to  save  the  fur-seal  herd  through 
legislation  designed  to  prevent  the  re- 
leasing of  the  sealing  right,  the  cessation 
of  all  killing  on  the  islands  for  10  years 
except  for  natives'  food,  and  to  secure 
the  opening  of  negotiations  with  Great 
Britain  to  revise  the  regulations  of  the 
Paris  tribunal.  As  the  result  of  this 
movement,  on  December  7  three  resolu- 
tions were  introduced  by  Senator  Dixon, 
of  Montana,  one  of  which  embodies  the 
provisions  before  mentioned,  the  other 
two  calling  for  the  publication  of  fur-seal 
correspondence  and  reports  since  1904. 

As  the  object  of  this  movement  is  at 
variance  with  the  program  of  this  bureau 
and  of  the  recommendations  of  the  ad- 
visory fur-seal  board,  notably  in  the  plan 
to  prevent  killing  and  the  renewal  of  the 
seal  island  lease,  the  advisability  is  sug- 
gested of  having  Messrs.  Townsend.  Lu- 
cas, and  Stanley-Brown  use  their  influ- 
ence with  such  members  of  the  Campfire 
Club  as  they  may  be  acquainted  with 
with  the  object  of  correctly  informing  the 
club  as  to  the  exact  present  status  of  the 
seal  question  and  of  securing  its  coopera- 
tion to  effect  the  adoption  of  the  measures 
advocated  by  this  bureau. 

The  attached  letter  is  prepared,  having 
in  view  the  object  stated. 

BARTON  W.  EVERMAXX. 

Exhibit  No.  7,  being  the  official  letter 
of  "George  M.  Bowers,  commissioner," 
to  Secretary  Commerce  and  Labor,  dated 
February  8.  1910.  inclosing  copies  of  three 
letters,  all  urging  renewal  of  the  seal  lease 
and  giving  the  reasons  of  the  writers  for 
such  renewal,  to  wit.  H.  H.  Taylor, 
president  X.  A.  C.  Go.  dated 

January  27.  1910:  C.  II.  Townsend.  for 
"fur-seal  advisory  board."  dated  January 
31,  ]910:  Alfred  Fraser.  London  agent  for 
the  N.  A.  C.  Co.  (lessees),  January  28, 
1910.  as  follows.  (Hearing  No.  3,  pp 
152-157.  July  6,  1911.) 

Sworn  proof  submitted  that 
Hitchcock  issued  the  rules  in  op- 
position to  Stejneger's  wish: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  11.-  did?  Right  there  I 
want  to  ask  you  about  this:  On  page  53  of 
"Hearing  on  Fur  Seals,"  March  10,  1904, 
Way.-  and  M<-i«iis  Committee.  Hon.-"  of 
Representatives,  Mr.  Hitchcock,  under 


166 


FUK-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


recommended  the  slaughter  of  just  now 
[to  Mr.  BOWERS],  did  he  consult  with  you 
about  this  matter? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  He  did. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  you  advised  him  to 
do  just  what  you  said'now? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  did. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  did  he  say  to  you? 
Do  you  remember? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  He  said  that  that  was 
not  in  his  hands.  He  said  it  was  up  to 
Congress.  He  said  he  consulted  me,  not 
as  to  what  he  should  do,  but  as  to  what  he 
should  answer  to  the  committee  that  was 
then  handling  the  question  in  Congress. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  he  agree  with  you? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  He  did.  ('Hearing  No. 
11,  p.  682,  May  4,  1912.) 


All  killing  of  fur  seals  on 
Pribilof  Islands  is  ordered  under 
"  recommendation  of  advisory 
board, "  of  which  Stejneger  is  a 
member : 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  have  referred,  in  my 
report  of  June  30,  1909,  to  the  Alaskan 
fur-seal  service  as  follows: 

"On  the  establishment  of  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor,  in  1903,  the 
Alaskan  fur-seal  service  was  transferred 
thereto  from  the  Department  of  the  Treas- 
ury, to  which  it  had  been  attached  for 
many  years .  In  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce and  Labor  this  service  formed  a 
distinct  branch  and  was  administered 
through  the  Secretary's  office  until  De- 
cember 28,  1908,  when  it  was  transferred 
to  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries.  The  Com- 
missioner of  Fisheries  has  appointed  a 
special  board,  composed  of  five  members 
of  the  bureau's  staff  who  have  personal 
knowledge  of  the  Alaskan  fur  seals,  and  to 
this  board  will  be  assigned  for  considera- 
tion and  recommendation  all  matters  per- 
taining to  the  seal  life  on  the  Pribilof 


the  caption  of  an  additional  statement, 
says: 

"1  waul  lo  say  to  the  committee  that 
the  restrictions  1  proposed  this  morning 
would  be  considered  extreme  by  thewe 
gentlemen.  There  is  not  one  of  these 
scientists  who  has  suggested  measures 
that  are  nearly  as  radical  as  those  I  have 
proposed.  I  have  purposely  made  the 
regulations  somewhat  extreme,  in  the 
view  of  these  gentlemen,  with  the  idea  of 
being  on  the  safe  side,  particularly  during 
the  first  year  of  the  department's  admin- 
istration of  the  seal  service." 

And  he  is  alluding  to  yourself  and  your 
a  -soriales? 

Dr.  STEJN  EG  K  u .  Where  is  that  allusion? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Preceding  here.    You  will 

find  it  on  this  page. 

*  *  *  *  * 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Therefore,  Mr.  Hitchcock 
did  not  agree  with  you,  did  he? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  did  not  say  he  did 
not  agree  with  me. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  thought  you  said  he 
agreed  with  you? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  That  he  could  do  it. 
That  does  not  mean  necessarily  that  the 
rules  should  be  framed  accordingly. 
That  is  altogether  different. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  other  words,  Mr. 
Hitchcock  did  not  take  your  advice  when 
he  proposed  those  rules? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  He  certainly  did  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  what  I  want;  that 
is  it,  Doctor.  (Hearing  No.  11,  pp.  682- 
684,  May  4,  1912.) 

Stejneger  swears  that  he  does 
not  know  whether  the  killing  has 
been  in  violation  of  law  or  not: 


The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  whether, 
of  your  own  personal  knowledge,  seals 
have  been  killed  that  were  too  small  or 
too  young,  under  the  act  of  Congress? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  do  not  know,  be- 
cause I  have  not  been  on  the  island  since 
1897— since  1896. 

***** 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Mr.  Elliott,  do  you 
want  to  ask  him  any  questions? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  only  a  few  ques- 
tions to  ask  him.  Dr.  Stejneger,  what  is 
the  length  of  a  yearling  fur  seal  of  the 
Alaskan  herd? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  could  not  tell  you. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  ever  measured 
one  of  the  Alaskan  herd? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  No. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  do  not  know  any- 
thing about  the  length  of  a  skin  of  a  year- 
ling seal  as  taken  from  the  body? 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


16' 


Islands,  the  blue  foxes,  and  other  animal 
resources  on  the  islands,  and  the  Govern- 
ment's relations  to  the  natives  and  the 
8.  On  January  13,  1909,  the  Secre- 
tary, on  the  recommendation  of  the  com- 
missioner, appointed  an  advisory  board 
for  the  fur-seal  service,  consisting  of  Dr. 
David  Starr  Jordan,  Dr.  Leonard  Stej- 
neger,  Dr.  C.  Hart  Merriam,  Mr.  Frederic 
A.  Lucas,  Hon.  Edwin  W.  Sims,  Hon. 
Frank  H.  Hitchcock,  and  Mr.  Charles  H. 
Townsend.  The  Government  is  thus 
enabled  to  avail  itself  of  the  expert  knowl- 
edge possessed  by  these  naturalists  and 
officials,  who,  through  visits  to  the  seal 
islands  and  through  previous  duty  on 
fur-seal  commissions  or  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  fur-seal  service,  are  familiar 
with  the  problems  involved  in  the  man- 
agement of  the  seal  herd  and  the  seal 
islands.  (Hearing  No.  2,  p.  78,  June  9, 
1911.) 


Stejneger  swears  that  pups  are 
naturally  trampled  to  death  by 
the  bulls,  but — 

Mr.  Mc<  ii'ii-K.  According  to  your  ob- 
servation, now.  Doctor,  it  those  herds 
were  left  alone  untouched  by  man,  what 
w<  >uld  you  regard  as  the  principal  agencies 
-iruction  of  that  animal  life? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  The  principal  destruc- 
tion would  probably  be  the  killing  or  the 
doyth  of  the  old  by  natural  causes. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Would  you  regard  that 
»ut  the  second  most  destructive 
agency? 

Dr.  STBJNEGER.  I  should  think  that  if 
they  were  left  and  had  been  left  for  some 
time  by  themselves  it  would  be  the  fight- 
ing of  the  males. 

Mr.  M<  UuiRE.  The  lighting  of  the 
males  and  trampling  of  the  pups? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Fighting  of  the  males 
and  trampling  of  the  pups. 

Mr.  McGuiuK.  Then,  where  they  were 
left  untouched  until  they  had  accumu- 
lated large  numbers  of  males,  would 
there  have  been  trampling  under  those 
conditions? 

Dr.  STEJNECIER.  That  is  the  greatest 
danger  to  the  herd. 

Mr.  McGriRE.  Now.  your  testimony 
with  respect  to  the  killing  of  the  pups  by 
the  fighting  of  battles  by  the  males  is 
based  upon  not  only  your  general  infor- 
mation, that  you  have  been  able  to  ob- 
tain in  general  way.  but  as  well  upon 
two  years'  actual  stay  upon  seal  islands? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Yes,  sir. 


Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Of  a  yearling  seal?  I 
do  not  know;  I  have  never  seen  a  yearling 
seal  killed  on  the  American  islands. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Were  you  in  consulation 
with  Mr.  Bowers  when  he  ordered  the 
killing  of  12,920  seals  on  the  seal  islands 
in  1910? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Do  you  mean  in  per- 
sonal special  consultation  with  Mr.  Bow- 
era? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  Mr.  Bowers — 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Not  outside  of  whaf*I 
have  said  in  the  board. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No,  no.  I  asked  you, 
did  Mr.  Bowers  advise  with  you? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Personally? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Not  when  he  issued  his 
order  to  kill  12,920  seals  in  1910? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  I  do  not  quite  under- 
stand whether  it  was  with  me  personally 
or  as  a  member  of  the  board . 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Well,  as  a  member  of  the 
board,  do  you  remember  any  consultation 
with  him  about  issuing  those  orders? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  No;  I  do  not  remem- 
ber. (Hearing  No.  11,  pp,  679, 681,  May  4, 
1911.) 

Lucas  swears  that  pups  are  not 
trampled  to  death  by  the  bulls: 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  many  days  were  you 
on  the  islands  in  1896?  I  want  that 
answered. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  On  the  islands  and  at  sea 
on  the  Rush,  going  to  and  from  St.  Paul 
and  St.  George — 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  not  my  question, 
sir. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  will  have  to  figure  it  up 
if  you  want  the  exact  number  of  days. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  you  don't  know? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  can  find  that  out.  I  have 
it  on  record  here. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  About  how  many 
days? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  About  50  days  in  1896. 
allowing  about  9  days'  time  spent  at  sea 
going  to  and  from  one  island  to  another. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  1897  how  many  days 
were  you  on  the  islands? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  About  42  days. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  On  the  islands? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  That  is  about  the  number. 
I  have  the  exact  data  right  here. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  Dr.  Lucas,  did  you 
see  up  there  a  pup  trampled  to  death  by 
a  bull? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No.  (Hearing  No.  12.  p. 
719.  May  16,  1912.) 


168 


FUR-SEAL   HERD    OF   ALASKA. 


Mr.  McGuiRE.  And  upon  your  actual 
observation? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Surveys  of  the  rook- 
fries  . 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  You  have  personally 
observed  those  conditions,  have  you? 

Dr.  STEJNEGER.  Yes,  sir.  (Hearing  No. 
11,  pp.  701,  702,  703,  May  11,  1912.) 

Stejneger  would  kill  yearlings 
if  the  law  did  not  prevent,  but— 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  wheih<>r 
of  your  own  penoDal  knowledge  .seal* 
have  boon  killed  that  were  too  small  or  too 
young,  under  the  act  <>i  Congress'* 

Dr!  STEJNEGER.  I  do  not  know,  because 
I  have  not  been  on  the  island  siu«  <-  1897- 
since  1896. 

If  I  may  be  allowed  to  make  a  state- 
ment, since  you  ask  whether  1  had  any 
statement  to  make,  the  law  is  the  law.  ami 
has  to  be  lived  up  to;  but  whether  **al  i> 
killed  as  1-year-old  or  when  older  could  no; 
affect  the  seal  herd  i<>  any  extent  and  could 
not  hurt  it  at  all;  you  might  just  in  we|| 
kill  1-year-olds  or  2-year-olds  <  >r  3-year-i  >1<  U. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  you  could  not  kill  as 
large  a  percentage  of  J -year-olds  as  of  2  or 
3  year  olds.  The  1-year-olds  would  be 
2-year-olds  the  next  year,  and  then  you 
would  kill  them  anyhow.  The  Govern- 
ment would  realize  a  little  loss  money  for 
the  smaller  skins.  That  would  be  the 
whole  result.  (Hearing:  Xo.  11.  p.  679, 
May  4,  1912.) 


Merriam  would  not  kill  year- 
lings "under  any  circumstances." 

Mr.  McGuiKE.  Then,  in  case  anyone  in 
Ihe  I  louse  oniepresonlaliveshasi'sed  your 
name  as  a  person  who  would  be  opposed  to 
the  killing  on  llie  islands  they  were  wrong 
about  your  position? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  They  were  wrong, 
have  never  taken  any  such  position.  I 
have  always  held  the  contrary.  ]  have 
always  stated,  since  the  first  time  I  went 
there,  that  conservative  killing  on  the 
islands  was  a  benefit  to  the  herd  and  not  an 
injury,  but  I  should  not  allow  the  killing 
•  >f  yearlings  under  any  circumstances,  and 
I  should  not  kill  more  than  75  per  cent  of 
the  young  on  land  at  any  one  time.  I 
would  be  sure  to  leave  more  than  enough 
for  possible  contingencies. 

Mr.  MHiuiRK.  Have  you  m-ule  any 
personal  investigation  as  to  whether  the 
Government  has  killed  excessively? 

Dr.  MERHIAM.  I  know  nothing  about 
that  from  personal  knowledge.  (Hearing 
Xo.  11.  pp.  694.  (i<tt.  May  4,  W12.-J 


III. 

The  sworn  statements  of  Dr.  Barton  W.  Evermann,  who  is  one  of  the  experts  cited  to  the 
United  States  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation  of  National  Resources,  January  14, 
1911,  and  to  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  Department  of  Commerce  and 
Labor,  June  9,  1911,  by  Secretary  Charles  Nagel  as  his  authority  for  killing  seah  in 
violation  of  the  law  and  regulations,  to  wit: 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Yes,  sir.  I  ought  to  have  another  statement  here  that  I  would  like 
to  have  offered,  but  I  am  not  able  to  find  it  at  present.  If  the  gentlemen  will  permit, 
I  wish  to  say  that  these  regulations  are  in  conformity  to  recommendations  made  by 
this  advisory  board. 

Mr.  CABLE.  Give  the  names  of  the  members  of  the  advisory  board. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  The  members  of  the  fur-seal  board  and  of  the  advisory  board,  fur- 
seal  service,  are  as  follows: 

Dr.  Barton  Warren  Evermann  (chairman),  who  is  chief  of  the  Alaska  fisheries 
service  and  who  has  been  in  Alaska  a  number  of  times.  He  was  a  member  of  the  fur- 
seal  commission  of  1892,  when  he  spent  six  months  in  the  North  Pacific  and  Bering 
Sea  and  on  the  seal  islands  studying  the  fur  seal.  (Hearing  No.  2.  p.  109,  June  9, 1911.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


169 


THK  MKAPI.Y  PARALLEL. 


He  stretcl-e-:  before  his  cross- 
examination  ho  spent  "six months 
on  our  seal  islands  studying."  etc. 


'  IT  K  E  0  N    E  X P  K  X  I  >I T  U  R  K  S 

IN  THE  DEPARTMENT  OK  COM- 
MERCE AND  LABOR.  Hoi 

OF     MKI'HKSKNTATIVES. 

\Vnthuifitoi..  Saturday,  April  20,  191 J. 

Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman'. 
presiding. 

Present:  Hon.  Jaii!>  Daniel  J. 

McGilUcuddy,  Bird  S.  MeGuire.  ami 
(  harles  E.  Patten. 

TESTIMONY     OF     BARTON     W.     EVERMANN. 

Thewitii-  rn  by  the  chairman. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Within  the  last  2"> 
nearly  a  score  of  the  most  distin- 
guished naturalists  not  only  of  this  coun- 
try, but  of  Great  Britain.  Canada,  and 
Japan  have  visited  our  seal  islands  for  the 
spe<  ifie  purpose  of  studying  the  habits  of 
the  fr-r  seals  and  the  problems  connected 
with  the  proper  management  of  the  herd. 
Among  these  gentlemen  I  may  mention 
the  following.  (Reading:) 

"Dr.  Bart  >ri  Warren  Evermann.  in 
charge  of  the  Alaska  fisheries  service, 
as  special  fur-seal  commissioner  in 
1892.  spent  six  months  on  our  seal  islands 
in  th"  North  Pacific  and  on  the  Russian 
seal  islands,  studying  the  fur-seal  rook- 
cries,  hauling  grounds,  and  migrations." 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  take  most  of  this 
information  you  get  from  records  and 
document-,  do  yui  not.  Doctor'.' 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  have  been  in  the 
islands  myself. 

•The  CHAIRMAN.  Or  from  actual  per- 
:  vat  ions? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  have  ;  een  in  the 
-lands  mv- 

The  CHAIRMAN.   \\Iu-n  wa<  that? 

Dr.  EVE  KM  ANN.   In  1S92. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  loni;  were  you  there? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  spent  six  months  on 
a  fnr-<eul  IIP. v-t Ration  in  18^2.  • Hearing 


He  shrinks;  after  liis  cross-ex- 
amination he  "spent  only  10 
days  on  our  seal  islands  study- 
ing,'' 

COMMITTEE  ox  EXPENDITURES 
ix  THE  DEPARTMEXT  OF  COM- 
MERCE AND  LABOR.  HOUSE 
OF   REPRESENTATIVES. 
Thursday,  April  2,5.  1912. 
The  committee  met  at  10.30  o'clock 
a.  m..  pursuant  to  recess  taken.  Hon.  John 
H.  Rothermel  (chairman)  presiding. 

STATEMENT  OF  DR.  BARTON  W.  EVEJIMANN. 
CHIEF,  ALASKA  FISHERIES  SERVICE. 
BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Dr.  Evermann,  when  did 
you  first  go  to  the  seal  islands? 

Dr.  EVERMAXN.  In  the  spring  of  1892. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  \Vhendidyoulandthere? 

Dr.  EVERMAXN.  I  do  not  recall  the 
exact  date  when  I  landed  on  either  of  the 
islands. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Do  you  know  the  month? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  It  wa<  either  July  or 
August. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Was  that  your  first  land- 
ing'? 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  Yes. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Which  island  did  you 
land  011? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  first  landed  on  St.. 
Paul  and  later  I  went  to  St.  George. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  About  what  time  did  you 
land  on  St.  Paul0 

Dr.  EVERMAXN.  Some  time  in  July  or 
August. 

Me.  ELLIOTT.  How  long  did  you  stay 
there'.' 

Dr.  !.  s.  Onlv  a  few  days. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  do  you  mean  by  a 
"few  day 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  The  exa<  t  number  or 
days  I  can  not  recall. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Was  it  two  days? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  It  was  about  a  week  or 
10  days.  (I  have  since  consulted  the 
record:  I  find  I  was  on  the  Pribilof  Is- 
lands continuously  from  July  Hi  t  • 
July  :51 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  stayed  on  St.   Paul 
all  that  time? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  was  on  both  islands. 

>'r.  ELLIOTT.  You  went  over  to  St. 
Geor. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.   V 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  long  were  you  on  the 
i-'lands0 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  « >nlv  a  very  u-w 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That   i*  what   I  th< 
(Hearing  No.  10.  p.  «i21.« 


170 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Kvermann  compelled  to  admit 
that  he  has  had  only  a  few  days' 
experience  on  the  seal  islands. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Dr.  Evermann,  when  did 
you  first  go  to  the  seal  islands? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  In  the  spring  of  1892. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  did  you  land  there? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  do  not  recall  the 
exact  date  when  I  landed  on  either  of  the 
islands. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Do  you  know  the  month? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  It  was  either  July  or 
August. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Was  that  your  first  land- 
ing? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Yes. 
--Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Which    island    did    you 
land  on? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  first  landed  on  St. 
Paul  and  later  I  went  to  St.  George. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  About  what  time  did  you 
land  on  St.  Paul? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Some  time  in  Jaly  or 
August. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  long  did  you  stay 
there? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Only  a  few  days. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  do  you  mean  by  a 
"few  days"? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  The  exact  number  of 
days  I  can  not  recall. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Was  it  two  days? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  It  was  about  a  week 
or  10  days.  (I  have  since  consulted  the 
record;  I  find  I  was  on  the  Pribilof  Islands 
continuously  from  July  19  to  July  31.) 
(Hearing  No.  10,  p.  621,  Apr.  24,  1912.) 

The  "Carlisle  rules,"  of  Mav 
14,  1896,  which  prohibit  the  kilt- 
ing of  yearling  male  seals,  and 
which  have  never  been  amended 
or  revised  until  1904,  when  a  5\- 
pound  limit  was  made  in  lieu  of 
the  6-pound  limit . 

TREASURY  DEPARTMENT, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY. 
Washington,  D.  C.,  May  14,  1896. 

Mr.  J.  B.  ("ROWLEY, 

Special  Agent  in  Charge  of  the  -S^// 
Islands,  care  North  American  Com- 
mercial Co.,  San  Francisco,  Cal. 

SIR:  I  inclose  herewith  for  your  infor- 
mation copy  of  a  letter  dated  13th  in- 
stant, addressed  to  me  by  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  and  approved  by  him,  in 
relation  to  the  taking  of  fur  seals  on  the 
Priblof  Islands  and  determining  the 
quota  of  such  seals  to  be  allowed  the 
North  American  Commercial  Co.  during 
the  season  of  1896.  You  are  instructed  to 
permit  said  company  to  take  on  the 
islands  during  the  season  of  1896  all  kill- 


And  while  there  learned  noth- 
ing a l)ou t  the  si/e  and  weight  of 
sealskins  he  knows  nothing. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  make  any  rec- 
ords of  lengths  and  measurements,  weights 
and  growth  of  seals  while  you  were  there? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  did  of  some  seals 
which  I  assisted  in  taking  on  the  Com- 
mander Islands. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No,  no;  I  mean  these 
islands. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  made  notes  oi 
weights  and  measurements  so  far  as  I 
recall  at  this  time.  I  did  not  weigh  or 
measure  any  seals  on  St.  Paul  or  St. 
George. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  say  your  observa- 
tion on  the  islands  does  not  cover  thai 
point  at  all? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  My  statement  regard- 
ing the  measurements  and  weights  of  fur 
seals  is  the  one  to  which  I  called  attention 
yesterday. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  know;  I  have  not  dis- 
puted that,  but  I  want  to  find  what  you 
did  on  the  island.  You  didn't  do  any- 
thing, you  say. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  didn't  say  that. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  didn't  weigh  or 
measure  a  seal  on  the  islands,  did  you? 

Dr.  EVEKMANX.  My  recollection  is  that 
I  did  not.  , 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  If  you  had,  you  woulc 
have  made  notes  of  it,  wouldn't  you? 

Dr.  EVERMANX.  I  presume  I  would. 
(Hearing  No.  10.  pp.  621-622,  Apr.  24, 
1912.) 

Dr.  Evermann,  under  oath, 
swears  that  no  regulations  were 
ever  issued  by  the  Government 
forbidding  the  killing  of  yearling 
seals,  except  in  1904  and  1905. 
A  falsehood,  and  studied  to  de- 
ceive the  committee. 

Dr.  EVERMANN. 

2.  The  second  charge  is  that  at  least 
128,478  yearling  male  seals  were  killed  by 
the  lessee  from  1880  to  1909,  both  inclu- 
sive, contrary  to  law  and  the  regulations. 

In  answer  to  this  charge  it  should  be 
sufficient  to  say  that  the  law  has  never 
made  it  illegal  to  kill  yearling  male  seals 
nor  has  it  ever  been  contrary  to  the  regu- 
lations to  kill  yearling  male  seals,  except 
in  the  seasons  of  1904  and  1905,  as  is  shown 
by  the  regulations  for  the  various  years  to 
which  I  have  called  your  attention. 
Therefore,  even  if  128,478  yearling  male 
seals  have  been  killed  since  1890  (which 
is  not  admitted),  they  could  not  have 
been  killed  illegally,  because  there  was 
no  law  against  killing  yearling  male  seals, 
and  there  has  been  no  regulation  against 


FUB-SEAL   HERD  OF   ALASKA. 


171 


able  male  seals  over  and  above  the  num- 
ber which,  in  your  opinion,  is  sufficient  to 
fertilize  the  female  seals,  the  number 
taken  not  to  exceed  in  any  event  30,000 
seals.  The  killing  of  yearlings  and  seals 
whose  skins  weigh  less  than  6  pounds  is 
prohibited. 

Respectfully,  yours, 
(Signed)  C.  S.  HAM  LIN, 

Acting  Secretary. 

(Official  entry  of  the  above  on  p.  14  of 
the  journal  of  the  chief  special  agent  in 
charge  of  the  seal  islands,  St.  Paul 
Island,  under  date  of  entry  as  follows: 
''Tuesday,  June  17,  1896.") 


Evermann  swears  that  there 
are  no  regulations  by  Nagel  which 
prohibit  the  killing  of  yearlings. 


Dr.  EVERMANN.  Page  8,  Mr.  Elliott 
says: 

''The  law  and  the  regulations  of  Mr. 
Xagel  forbid  the  killing  of  any  seal '  under 
two  years  of  age.'  " 

The  law  has  never  forbidden  the  killing 
of  male  seals  under  two  years  of  age;  nor 
has  any  regulation  issued  by  Secretary 
Nasel. "  (Hearing  No.  10,  p.  585,  Apr.  24, 
1912.) 


killing  yearling  male  seals,  except  in  1904 
to  1909. 

But  I  shall  not  rest  with  that  answer. 
Although  it  has  always  been  perfectly 
legal  to  kill  1-year-old  male  seals,  and 
although  the  regulations,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  few  years  mentioned,  have 
never  said  that  1-year-old  male  seals 
should  not  be  killed,  nevertheless  the 
agents'  reports,  state  and  show  that  it  has 
never  been  the  practice  during  these 
twenty-odd  years  to  kill  any  seals  under 
2  years  old.  This  has  been  explicitly 
stated  again  and  again  by  the  agents,  and 
the  department  has  no  reason  to  doubt  the 
truth  of  their  reports.  (Hearing  Xo.  10r 

&,  493,  Apr.  24,  1912,  Ho.  Com.   Exp. 
ept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

But  Lembkey  swears,  February 
29,  1912,  that  there  are  such  regu- 
lations, and  which  have  the  force 
of  law. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  On  page  8,  line  8  from 
the  bottom,  you  say: 

''The  law  and  regulations  of  Mr.  Xagel 
forbids  the  killing  of  any  seal  'under  two 
years  of  age."  " 

Is  that  true. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  true. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Does  the  law  say  so? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  ''law  and  regula- 
tions !  say  so;  yes. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Does  the  law  say  so? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes;  the  regulations  have 
the  force  of  law.  (Hearing  No.  10,  p. 
613.  Apr.  24,  1912.) 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  may  be  useful  to  bear 
in  mind,  however,  that  small  seals  and 
female  seals  may  be  taken  at  any  time  for 
natives'  food  without  violation  of  existing 
law. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  It  would  not  be  allowed 
under  the  regulations? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Under  the  regulations 
it  would  not  be,  but  it  would  not  be  an 
illegal  act  to  kill  those  if  the  regulations 
would  allow  such  practice.  I  am  just 
bringing  out  that  point. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  You  say  that  the  regula- 
tions do  not  allow  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  And  the  regulations  have 
the  effect  of  law?  • 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  Yes. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  If  they  were  killed  it 
would  be  a  violation  of  law. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  would;  if  the  regula- 
tions permitted  it,  however,  it  would  be 
in  accordance  with  existing  law. 

It  should  be  remembered  also  that  the 
law  does  not  prohibit  the  killing  of  any 
male  seal  over  1  year  or  12  months  of  age. 
although  regulations  of  the  department 
do  prohibit  the  killing  of  anything  less 


172 


FUR-SEAL  HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


Assistant  Agent  Judge,  in  order 
to  save  the  " spared"  3-year-olds 
from  being  all  killed  as  "food 
seals/'  urges  a  7-pound  maximum 
skin  limit  for  such  seals. 


Presuming  that  branding  of  bachelors 
is  to  continue,  a  rule  fixing  a  maximum 
weight  of  7  pounds  for  food  skins  taken  in 
the  fall  would  save  the  3-year-olds,  which 
I  take  to  be  the  all-important  object. 
(Appendix,  A,  p.  180:  Report  of  Asst. 
Agent  Jas.  Judge,  St.  George  Island,  June 
5,  1905,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and 
Labor,  June  24,  19ll.) 


than  2  years  old .  or  those  seals  which  have 
returned  to  the  islands  from  their  second 
migration. 

Mr.  TOWNSEND.  That  is  a  regulation  of 
the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Of  Commerce  and 
Labor;  yes,  sir.  (Hearing  No.  9,  p.  372. 
Mar.  1,  1912.) 

But  Lembkey,  with  the  Bureau 
of  Fisheries  " science,"  orders  an 
"8^-pound"  maximum  food  skin 
limit,  so  as  to  get  those  "  re- 
served" seals  of  June  and  July 
in  October  and  November  follow- 
ing. 

Mr.  MtGuiRE.  Right  there,  Mr.  Lemb- 
key, did  you  prohibit  their  killing  them? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  did. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Over  4  years  of  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  did. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  1904? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  do  it  in  1905? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  did  you  do  it?  You 
had  no  brand  on  them. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  By  fixing  a  limit  of 
8£  pounds  on  the  skins  to  be  taken. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  could  you  preserve 
any  skins  without  having  them  marked? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  We  would  avoid  the 
killing  of  them  and  thereby  preserve 
them.  If  you  do  not  kill  a  seal  you  allow 
it  to  live,  do  you  not? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  My  dear  sir,  how  do  you 
know  what  you  see  hereafter?  Every  seal 
after  it  passes  its  third  year  without  a 
mark  on  it,  you  kill  it. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  beg  your  pardon? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Every  seal  that  passed 
from  its  third  year,  that  passed  from  1904, 
became  a  4-year-old  in  1905,  did  it  not? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes.  (Hearing  No.  9, 
p.  458,  Apr.  13,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

[Instructions  issued  Mar.  9,  1906.] 

Dr.  EVERMANX: 

"SEC.  8.  Sizes  of  killable  seals. — No 
seals  shall  be  killed  having  skin  weighing 
less  than  5  pounds  nor  more  than  8j 
pounds. 

"SEC.  10.  Seals  for  food. — The  number 
of  seals  to  be  killed  by  the  natives  for  food 
for  the  fiscal  year  beginning  July  1,  1906, 
shall  not  exceed  1,700  on  the  island  of  St. 
Paul  and  500  on  the  island  of  St.  George, 
subject  to  the  same  limitations  and  re- 
strictions as  apply  to  the  killing  of  seals  by 
the  company  for  the  quota."  (Hearing 
No.  30,  pp.  483,  484:  Apr.  20.  1912.) 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


173 


Dr.  Evermann  says  he  did  not 
wish  to  renew  the  lease — not  he; 
nor  did  any  of  his  official  asso- 
ciates; oh,  no — 

Dr.  EVERMANK .  Now,  as  to  re-leasing 
the  islands.  1  do  not  understand  the  pur- 
pose of  Mr.  Elliott  and  certain  followers  of 
his  in  seeking  to  show  that  the  advisory 
board,  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  and  their 
individual  members  favored  re-leasing  the 
islands. 

Your  attention  is  called  also  to  the 
recommendations  of  the  advisory  board 
dated  November  23,  1909.  Recommen- 
dation No.  3  says: 

"It  is  recommended  that  there  be 
adopted  a  system  of  regulations  similar  to 
those  in  force  on  the  Commander  Islands, 
the  Government  to  assume  entire  control 
in  all  essential  matters  pertaining  to  the 
fur  seals,  blue  foxes,  natives,  and  the 
islands  in  general,  and  the  lessee  to  be 
restricted  to  the  receiving,  curing,  and 
shipping  of  the  skins  taken." 

This  recommendation  was  unanimously 
agreed  to  by  the  advisory  board,  fur-seal 
service  (Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan,  chair- 
man; Dr.  Leonard  Stc-jneger,  Dr.  Fred- 
eric A.  Lucas,  Mr.  Edwin  W.  Sims,  Dr. 
Charles  H.  Townsend),  the  fur-seal  board 
(Dr.  Barton  Warren  Evermann,  chair- 
man; Mr.  Walter  I.  Lembkey,  and  Mr. 
Millard  C.  Marsh),  the  Commissioner  of 
Fisheries  (Hon.  George  M.  Bowers),  the 
Deputy  Commissioner  of  Fisheries  (Dr. 
Hugh  M.  Smith),  assistant  fur-seal  agent 
(H.  D.  Cliichester'i.  and  special  scientific 
expert  (Mr.  George  A.  Clark).  (See  p. 
814.  Appendix  A. 

I  desire  the  committee  to  note  also  that 
the  elimination  of  the  lessee  was  thus 
recommended  long  before  Dr.  Hornaday, 
representing  the  Camp  Fire  Club,  ap- 
peared before  the  Senate  Committee  on 
Conservation  and  properly  opposed  the 
leasing  system,  which  he  did  at  the  hear- 
ings of  February  26  and  March  22,  1910. 
This  was  more  than  a  year  after  Dr.  Jor- 
dan had  expressed  the  ''hope  that  the 
Government  will  not  under  any  circum- 
stances lease  the  products  of  the  islands, 
at  least  in  such  form  as  has  been  in  vogue 
for  the  past  40  years. ' '  And  it  was  more 
than  three  months  after  the  Commissioner 
of  Fisheries  and  six  other  members  of  the 
Bureau  of  Fisheries  united  with  the  ad- 
visory board  in  a  recommendation  that 
the  leasing  system  be  discontinued. 
(Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  981,  982,  July  29, 
1912.) 


But  his  record  shows  that  he 
was  hard  at  the  very  job,  with 
those  associates  in  full  cry  with 
him,  too. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  I  want  Mr.  Bowers  to 
pay  some  attention  to  this  because  this 
is  impoitant,  at  least  some  good  lawyers 
have  told  me  that  it  is  very  important  to 
him — 

"Being  an  official  letter  covering  a 
'memorandum'  addressed  to  George  M. 
Bowers,  commissioner,  urging  him  to  take 
steps  to  prevent  the  passage  of  the  Dixon 
fur-seal  resolutions  introduced  in  the 
United  States  Senate  by  Senator  Joseph 
M.  Dixon.  (S.  Res.  90,  91,  92.) 

"December  7,  1909.  This  letter  from 
the  'bureau,'  dated  December  16,  1909, 
and  signed  by  Barton  W.  Evermann, 
urges  Bowers  to  send  agents  to  New  York, 
thore  to  'educate'  the  Camp  Fire  Club 
and  induce  them  to  agree  to  the  'bureau's 
idea  of  renewing  the  lease,'  as  follows: 

EXHIBIT  No.  6. 

DEPARTMENT  OP  COMMERCE 
AND  LABOR, 
BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 
Washington,  December  16,  1909. 
The  COMMISSIONER: 

The  Washington  Star  of  December  10 
last  announced  that  the  Campfire  Club,  of 
New  York,  had  inaugurated  a  campaign 
to  save  the  fur-seal  her4  through  legisla- 
tion designed  to  prevent  the  re-leasing  of 
the  sealing  right,  the  cessation  of  all  kill- 
ing on  the  islands  for  10  years  except  for 
natives'  food,  and  to  secure  the  opening 
of  negotiations  with  Great  Britain  to  re- 
vise the  regulations  of  the  Paris  tribunal. 
As  the  result  of  this  movement,  on  Decem- 
ber 7  three  resolutions  were  introduced  by 
Senator  Dixon,  of  Montana,  one  of  which 
em  bod  ies  the  provisions  before  mentioned, 
the  other  two  calling  for  the  publication 
of  fur-seal  correspondence  and  reports 
since  1904. 

As  the  object  of  this  movement  is  at 
variance  with  the  program  of  this  bureau 
and  of  the  recommendations  of  the  advis- 
ory fur-seal  board,  notably  in  the  plan  to 
prevent  killing  and  the 'renewal  of  the 
seal-island  lease,  the  advisability  is  sug- 
gested of  having  Messrs.  Townsend,  Lucas, 
and  Stanley-Brown  use  their  influence 
with  such  members  of  the  Campfire  Club 
as  they  may  be  acquainted  with,  with  the 
object  of  correctly  informing  the  club  as 
to  the  exact  present  status  of  the  seal 
question  and  of  securing  its  cooperation 
to  effect  tl  •  adoption  of  the  measures 
advocated  by  this  bureau. 

The  attached  letter  is  prepared,  having 
in  view  the  object  stated. 

BARTON  W.  EVERMANN. 


174 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


The  self-confessed  sham  of 
"accurate  count/'  or  ''census," 
of  the  fur-seal  herd. 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  call  your  attention  to 
the  census  tables  that  you  have  just  been 
talking  about,  and  on  page  606  this 
appears: 

••Official  reports  of  Department  of 
Commerce  and  Labor  to  Congress  from 
1904,  annually,  made  to  close  of  season 
of  1909,  declare  that  in  1904,  243,103  seals 
of  all  classes  alive  August  1,  1904;  1905, 
223,000  seals  of  all  classes  alive  August 
1,  1905;  1906,  185,000  seals  of  all  classes 
alive  August  1,  1906." 

And  so  on.  You  bring  this  down  to 
August  1,  1910,  and  in  1911  you  an- 
nounced to  the  House  Committee  on 
Foreign  Affairs  that  there  were  about 
133,000  seals  of  all  classes  alive.  Now, 
in  1904,  according  to  this  statement, 
there  were  243,103  seals  of  all  classes  alive 
August  1,  1904.  Now,  Mr.  Chairman,  I 
would  like  to  have  Dr.  Evermann  explain 
to  your  committee  why  in  these  long 
series  of  census  tables — from  1904  to 
1911 — he  has  made  no  subtraction  for 
loss  by  pelagic  sealing,  the  most ' '  terrible 
destruction"  which  he  claims  was  at 
work  on  that  herd ;  and  why  in  making  up 
these  census  tables  and  emitting  these 
official  alarm  calls  to  Congress  about  this 
"terrible  destruction"  he  ,  neglects  to 
subtract  that  loss  from  these  tables. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  do  you  mean 
by  "loss"? 

*Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  loss  entailed  by 
pelagic  sealing.  There  is  not  a  seal 
subtracted  from  these  tables  for  that; 
not  a  single  seal  that  the  pelagic  hunter 
has  destroyed  since  1904 . 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  the  object  of 
your  statement  in  this  connection? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  To  show  that  these 
census  tables  are  of  no  value;  they  mean 
nothing;  they  do  not  show  the  number  of 
seals  that  are  there.  He  admits  it  here 
tonight;  that  these  seals  are  out  at  sea 
and  wandering  about  in  the  nebulous 
North  Pacific,  and  thev  have  them  all 


"Exhibit  Xo.  7.  Being  the  official  lette 

of  'George1  M.   Bowers,  commissioner,'  to 
Secretary   Commerce  and   Labor,    datec 
February  S.  1010.  inclosing  «-<>pics  of  three 
letters,  all  urging  renewal  of  the  seal  lease 
and  giving  the  reasons  of  the  writers  for 
such  renewal,  to  wit,  H.  II.  Taylor,  presi 
dent  N.  A.  C.  Co.  (lessees),  dated  January 
27,   1910;  C.    II.  Townsend.  for    'fur-sea 
advisory  board,'  dated  January  31.  1910 
Alfred  i'Vaser.  London  acrent  for  the  N.  A 
C.  Co.  (lessees).  January  28,  1910,  as  fol 
lows."     (Hearintr  Xo.   3,  p.  157,' June  9 
1911.) 

Evermann  swears  that  the 
"ghost  dance"  seals  at  sea  always 
supply  the  loss  on  land: — Stej- 
neger,  "  authority." 

The  CHAIRMAN.  If  that  is  the  case 
let  Dr.  Evermann  explain  it. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  The  pelagic  sealer 
do  the  deducting — 

Mr.  ELLIOTT  (interposing).  You  do  not 
you  keep  right  on. 

Dr.  EVERMANN  (continuing).  And  w< 
count  only  what  are  left. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  seems  to  me  from 
what  he  read  and  the  way  Mr.  Elliot 
puts  the  question  to  the  witness,  that  h< 
is  under  the  impression  that  if  you  tak( 
the  census,  say,  of  1909,  in  August,  am 
there  are  found  100,000  seals,  that  nex 
year  when  those  seals  return  you  shoulc 
deduct  the  number  that  were  killed 
pelagic  sealers  in  calculating  the  nex* 
census.  Is  that  correct? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  it ;  and  they  have 
got  to  do  it;  if  not  done,  then  the  census 
is  erroneous. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Of  course,  that  i 
perfectly  easily  understood.  You  wil 
recall  that  in  Dr.  Stejneger's  testimony 
he  made  the  statement  that  his  observa 
tion  and  study  of  the  question  lead  him 
to  believe  that  a  relatively  small  per 
centage  of  the  yearling  seals  are  ever 
present  on  the  islands  at  any  one  time 
and  that  a  large  percentage  of  the  2-year 
olds  are  not  on  the  islands,  and  that  even 
a  percentage  of  the  older  seals — the  3 
4,  and  5  year  old  seals — are  not  upon  the 
islands  all  the  time.  Now,  those  numbers 
it  seems  to  me,  that  are  not  upon  the 
islands  at  any  time  will  enter  into  the 
catch  by  the  pelagic  sealers.  Bu 
whether  they  do  or  not,  that  would  not 
justify  you  in  reporting  a  fewernumbei 
of  seals  upon  the  islands  than  is  actual!} 
there.  Suppose  the  census  of  1910 
showed  on  the  islands  100,000  seals  at  the 
end  of  the  killing  season  and  the  statistics 
of  the  pelagic  catch  showed  a  killing 
of  exactly  100,000  seals  between  the 
time  of  taking  that  census  and  the  time 
that  you  would  take  the  next  census  in 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


175 


•'counted    in    their    miiul>."     (Hearing 
••.  pp.  935-937,  July  2 


Kvermunn  swears  that  no  man 
•  -vor  been  able  to  truly  toll  the 
seal's  ago.  as  a  yearling.  2-yoai1- 
old.  . 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.   Xi>  one  knows  and  no 

town  the  age  oi'  a:i 

on  ti.e  s<-a!  islands,  barring,  of  course,  the 
pii])s  of  tin-  year  that  have  not  yet  left. 
When  a  pup  is  born  on  the  islands.  s<> 

i  know  ii  g 

but  when  it  leaves  in  the  fall  and  conies 

again  the  nex1  you  do  not 

know  abs  >lutely  whether  it  is  the  pup 

i'i  the  preceding  summer  or  one  born 

two  or  three  summers  preceding. 

ihe  hearing  on  H.  R.  H5571.  House 
dttee  on  Foreign  Affairs.  .January  3. 
1912.  (Hearing  No.  14,  p.  930. 

Jr.lv  _ 


Evermann  does  not  know  the 
age  of  one  seal  on  the  islands,  yet 
he  is  able  to  count  them  all  by 
ages ! 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Again,  in  the  hearing  on 
H.  K .  1  (1571 .  House  Committee  on  Foreign 
Affairs.  January  3,  1912,  page  48,  In 

.No  one  knows  and  no  one  ever  has 
known  the  age  of  any  seal  on  the  seal  is- 
lands, barring,  of  course,  the  pups  of  the 
year  that  have  nor  yet  left.  When  a  pup 
is  born  on  the  island,  so  long  as  it  stays 
there  you  know  its  age.  but  when  it  leaves 
in  the  fall  and  comes  back  again  the  next 

.      you    do    not    know    absolutely 
whether  it  is  the  pup  born  in  the  preced- 

Tiimer  or  one  b^rn  two  or  three  sum- 
mers preceding." 

IT"  tolls  yon.  and  lie  told  them,  that  he 
did  not  know  a  S-yoyr-old  from  a  1-year- 
old  or  a  1-yur-nld  from  a  2-year-old."  and 
''that,  no  man  knows."  Now.  what  does 
he  do0  The  next  day  before  that  com- 
mittee. January  4.  1912.  paere  129,  Dr. 
Evernuinn  - 

the  end  «»f  the  killing  season  of 
1910;  that  is.  after  the  12.922  surplus  male 

\vere  killed,  this  was  the  census  of 


1911— then,  if  that  were  true,  and  if  Mr. 
Elliott's  contention  were  true,  there 
should  not  be  a  single  seal  on  the  islands 
in  1911,  should  there?  But  we  look  and 
see,  and  if  we  find  any  there  we  count 
them.  (Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  935,  936, 
July  25,  1912.) 

But,  the  next  clay  ho  returns, 
and  is  able  to  tell  the  ages  of 
each  and  every  seal  in  the  herd! 


Mr.  ELLIOTT,  lie  tells  you,  and  he  told 
them,  that  he  did  not  know  a  3-year-old 
from  a  1 -year-old  or  a  1 -year-old  from  a 
2-year-old,  and  "that  no  man  knows." 
Now.  what  does  he  do?  The  next  day 
that  committee.  January  4.  1912, 
page  129,  Dr.  Evermann  says: 

"At  the  end  of  the  killing  season  of 
1910.  that  is.  after  the  12.922  surplus  male, 
seals  were  killed,  this  was  the  census  of 
the  herd :  Bulls,  active  with  harem.  1 .3S 1 : 
bulls,  idle  and  quitters.  303  ('those  are 
surplus  bulls  i :  half  bulls.  2.33(5:  3-year- 
old  bachelors.  1.200:  2-year-old  bachelors, 
4.500:  yearling  bachelors,  11.441." 

Oh.  he  can  count  them  now! 

"Male  pups.  21.725." 

Oh.  he  counts  them  down  to  5! 

"Yearling  bachelors.  1 1 .441 :  male  pups. 
21.725:  breeding  cows.  43.450:  2-year-old 
cows.  12.124:  yearling  females.  11.441: 
female  pups.  21.725.  making  a  total  of 
131.626."  (Hearing  No.  14.  p.  930,  July 
25.  1912.- 

He  classifies  them  as  "green 
forms/7  "red  forms,"  etc.,  and 
then  counts  these  " forms"  of 
various  color! 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  May  I  say  just  a  word? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Yes*. 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  My  statement  on  page 
Absolutely  correct,  and  anyone  can 
see  that  it  is  correct  when  you  consider  it 
for  a  moment.  We  know  the  ages  of  the 
pups  that  are  born.  say.  this  year  on  the 
island;  we  know  their  ages  as  long  as  they 
stay  under  observation,  but  when  they 
leave  in  the  fall  and  we  see  nothing  more 
of  them  until  the  next  spring  it  is  perfectly 
evident  that  it  is  impossible  for  anybody 
to  pick  out  any  seal  next  spring  and  iden- 
tify it  with  any  particular  seal  which  was 
on" the  island  the  year  before  unless  it  has 
a  distinguishing  mark  upon  it.  and  these 
pups  have  no  distinguishing  mark,  of 
course.  You  could  say  that  all  of  the 
bonks  in  this  room  of  that  color  [indicat- 
ing] were  black  and  that  all  of  some  other 
color  were  red.  and  so  on.  That  would 
answer  our  purposes  for  classification; 
yet  in  this  case  we  know  it  is  not  true,  be- 
cause this  bunk  is  not  black.  And  in  the 


176 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


the  herd:  Bulls,  active  with  harem,  1,381 ; 
bulls,  idle  and  quitters,  303  (those  are 
surplus  hulls);  hall'  hulls,  2,336;  3-year- 
old  bachelors.  1.200;  2-year-old  bache- 
lors, 4,500;  yearling  bachelors,  11,441." 

Oh,  he  can  count  them  now  ! 

"Male  pups,  21,725.1" 

Oh,  he  counts  them  down  to  5 ! 

"'  Yearling  bachelors,  11 ,441 ;  male  pups, 
21,725;  breeding  cows,  43,450;  2-year-old 
cows,  12.124;  yearling  females,  11,441; 
femaje  pups,  21,725,  making  a  total  of 
131,626."  (Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  930,  931, 
July  25,  1912.) 


Evermann  swears  that  the  skins 
are  getting  better  every  year  un- 
der " scientific"  management. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  there  is  some- 
thing, and  since  Dr.  Evermann  is  here  I 
am  going  to  introduce  it.  Before  the 
House  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs,  Jan- 
uary 4,  1912,  Dr.  Evermann,  in  the 
course  of  his  address,  said  (see  p.  128): 

"The  skins  which  go  to  them  this  year 
are  better  than  those  which  they  received 
last  year  [that  is,  1910],  and  those  last 
year  were  better  than  those  received  the 
year  before  [that  is,  1909],  and  so  on." 

On  page  1007  of  Appendix  A  to  hearings 
before  this  Committee  on  Expenditures 
in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  La- 
bor is  a  letter  from  Alfred  Fraser  to  George 


other  case  we  do  not  know  the  seal  is  a 
3-year-old  seal  or  a  2-year-old  seal:  but 
the  probabilities  are  that  those  seals  which 
we  call  3-year-old  seals  are  3-year-old 
seals,  and  the  probabilities  an-  that  those 
\\e  call  2-year-old  seals  are  2-year-old 
seals;  but  it  is  not  a  matter  of  knowledge; 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  think  you  are 
dealing  with  probabilities  and  not  mathe- 
matical exact  n- 

Dr.  EVKK.VIA\\.  We  are  simply  hand- 
ling a  series  of  objects  which  are  before 
us.  which  can.  by  their  sizes  and  appear- 
ances. be  put  into  different  classes.  \Ve 
put  them  into  different  classes,  and  we 
i:ive  them  designated  terms.  \Ye  say  that 
these  possessing  this  size  and  this  general 
appearance  we  will  call  3-year-olds;  thos^ 
t!:at  have  certain  differences  from  the 
3-year-olds  we  call  2-year-olds.  Hut  .ve 
do  not  know  it.  and  Mr.  Elliott  does  not 
know  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  1  never  assumed  1  did 
anything  like  it  and  never  made  the  stu- 
pid assumption. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Mr.  Elliott  says  that 
because  certain  skins  weigh  'certain 
weights  they  must  have  been  year- 
lings — 

Mr.  ELLIOTT  (interposing.)  1  know  ii  . 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  But  he  does  not  know 
anything  about  it,  any  more  than  the  rest 
of  us;  he  assumes  they  are  yearling  seals. 
It  is  assumed  that  skins  which  weigh  less 
than  5  pounds  are  yearlings,  and  that  as- 
sumption is  probably  correct. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  do  not  know  ii.  but 
I  do. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  1  think  that  is  all  I 
<'are  to  say.  (Hearing  No.  14.  pp.  931. 
932.  July  25. 


But,  the  London  sales  expert 
regrets  to  find  that  the  skins  are 
getting  poorer  year  after  year. 
NEW  YORK,  November  25,  1910. 

GEORGE  M.  BOWERS,  Esq., 

Commissioner  Bureau  of  Fisheries, 
Department  o/  Commerce  and 
Labor,    Washington,  D.  C. 

DEAR  SIR:  Inclosed  I  beg  to  hand  you 
particulars  of  assortment  of  the  Alaska  fur 
seal  received  this  day  from  C.  M.  Lampson 
&  Co.,  whose  valuation  of  the  skins  based 
upon  the  prices  realized  for  last  year's 
catch  is  12,732  skins  at  144s.  average  per 
skin  and  188  skins  at  120s.  ave.age  per 
skin.  The  latter  I  presume  are  food 
skins. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD  OF   ALASKA. 


177 


M.  I  lowers,  dated  November  25,  1910,  in 
which  this  language  appears: 

' '  DEAR  SIR:  Inclosed  I  beg  to  hand  you 
particulars  of  assortment  of  the  Alaska  fur 
seal  received  this  day  from  C.  M.  Lamp- 
son  &  Co.,  whose  valuation  of  the  skins, 
based  upon  the  prices  realized  for  last 
year's  catch,  is  12,732  skins  at  144s.  aver- 
age per  skin,  and  188  skins  at  120s.  aver- 
age per  skin.  The  latter  I  presume  are 
food  skins. 

"I  regret  to  find  that  the  assortment  is 
not  quite  up  to  that  of  last  year's  catch." 

Now,  how  do  you  reconcile  your  state- 
ment to  the  House  Committee  on  For- 
eign Affairs  with  this  official  notification 
that  you  are  not  telling  the  truth? 

Dr.  EVERMANX.  To  what  year  does 
that  refer? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  refers  to  the  catch 
of  the  year  1910  being  better  than  the 
year  1909. 

Dr.  E  VERM  AX  x.  My  references  are  to 
the  years  1910  and  1911. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT  (interposing).  You  go 
back  to  the  year  1909. 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  No. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  do. 

He  was  speaking  on  January  4,  1912, 
to  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs  of 
the  House,  and  speaking  of  the  catch 
of  1911.  He  could  not  speak  of  the  catch 
of  1912,  for  he  did  not  know  and  no  one 
could  know  about  the  catch  at  that 
time ;  and  if  he  did  not  know  how  it  was 
taken,  how  could  he  say  they  were  better 
than  the  catch  of  1911?  I  want  him  to 
answer  that  question. 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  We  know  what  our 
policy  is  as  to  possible  improvement  of 
the  catch  from  year  to  year.  (Hearing 
No.  14,  p.  929,  July  29,  1912.) 

Evermann  swears  that  there  is 
no  word  from  London  that  the 
skins  are  getting  inferior. 


Dr.  EVERMAXX.  And  Dr.  Hornaday, 
while  admitting  that  some  males  are  still 
left,  claims  that  they  are  not  virile.  Both 
Mr.  Elliott  and  Dr.  Hornaday  claim  that 
virile  male  life  has  been  inadequate  for 
many  years. 

If  such  has  been  the  case,  the  herd 
should  show  evidences  of  physical  deteri- 
oration. But  those  who  have  seen  the 
herd  in  recent  years  say  there  is  no  evi- 
dence of  physical  deterioration;  the. 
individual  seals  are  just  as  large  and  fine 
and  fit  at  any  given  age  as  they  ever  were. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  do  they  know  it? 
How  do  those  natives  know  it? 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  There  has  been  no 
complaint  from  London  that  the  skins 
were  not  as  fine  as  they  ever  were.  (Hear- 
ing No.  10,  p.  605,  Apr.  20,  1912.) 

21588—13 12 


I  regret  to  find  that  the  assortment  is 
not  quite  up  to  that  of  last  year's  catch. 

The  percentages  of  the  several  grades  of 
skins  as  compared  with  last  year's  collec- 
tion are  as  follows: 


Condition. 

Number. 

1910 

1909 

Prime  skins 

9.999 

Perct. 
78.53 

PfTCt. 

83.28 

Low  skins  

1,255 

9.86 

5.82 

Cut  skins 

821 

8.21 

6.45 

Rubbed  skins  

621 

4.88 

3.53 

Faulty  skins            .  . 

36 

.28 

.28 

12,732 

100 

100 

The  skins  count  up  two  short  of  the 
number  invoiced,  but  they  will  be  re- 
counted on  delivery. 

I  regret  to  state  that  the  fur  trade  so  far 
this  season  is  dull,  owing  in  a  great  meas- 
ure to  the  very  high  cost  of  all  articles, 
but  business  will  no  doubt  improve 
should  cold  weather  set  in.  . 

I  have  reason  to  believe  that  the  num- 
ber of  pelagic  seal  taken  this  year  will  be 
about  equal  to  that  of  last  year. 
Yours,  very  truly, 

ALFRED  FRASER. 

Mr.  SECRETARY:  Not  as  satisfactory  as 
I  should  like  to  have  seen  this  statement. 
Am  home  and  can  not  leave  to-day. 

GEO.  M.  BOWERS. 

NOVEMBER  26,  1910. 

(Appendix  A,  p.  1007,  June  24,  1911.) 


But  the  word  from  London  is 
published  urj  to  January  17,  1913, 
that  the  skins  are  inferior  from 
year  to  year,  growing  more  so! 

London  sales:  January  17,  1913. 
Philips  Politzer  &  Co.,  repojt. 

Alaskas  3,773  skins  (December,  1911, 
12,492).  The  quantity  offered  was  about 
a  quarter  of  the  last  sale  (December,  1911) 
and  with  the  exception  of  some  so-callea 
"food  skins"  no  more  are  expected  for 
five  years.  The  present  collection  was 
not  up  to  the  usual  standard  in  quality  or 
appearance,  in  spite  of  which,  nowever, 
prices  remained  very  firm.  (Fur  Trade 
Review,  New  York,  February,  1913, 
p.  66.) 


178 


FUK-SEAL  HERD  OP  ALASKA. 


Evermann  quotes  Townsend 
and  Lucas  to  prove  that  the 
seals  just  naturally  trample  their 
young  to  death. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  desire  to  incorporate 
in  my  statement  the  following  from  Dr. 
Charles  H.  Townsend,  Mr.  George  A. 
Clark;  and  Dr.  F.  A.  Lucas,  three  of  the 
best  informed  men  in  this  or  any  other 
country  on  the  fur-seal  question,  all  of 
whom  were  members  of  the  Fur-Seal 
Commissions  of  1896  and  1897: 

[Science,  Mar.  1,  1912.] 

THE    PRIBILOP   FUR-SEAL    HERD. 

In  Science  of  February  2,  1912,  Mr. 
McLean,  of  the  Campfire  Club's  commit- 
tee on  game  protection,  says,  among  other 
things,  about  the  diminishing  fur-seal 
herd,  that  "the  best  remedy  is  to  let  it 
absolutely  alone." 

Nature  s  methods  are  wasteful. 

Last  November  I  had  some  correspond 
ence  with  a  Member  of  the  House  of 
Representatives,  who  was  taking  the  agi- 
tation of  the  Campfire  Club  against  the 
killing  of  surplus  male  seals  very  seriously. 
I  quote  the  following  from  a  letter  I  wrote 
to  him  at  that  time: 

"In  order  to  prevent  annual  loss  of 
new-born  young,  we  must  prevent  the 
flooding  of  the  breeding  grounds  by  big 
males.  The  logical  way  to  do  this  is  to 
market  a  large  proportion  of  the  3-year 
olds,  as  we  always  have  done,  and  thus 
prevent  them  from  growing  up  into  value- 
less but  dangerous  and  destructive  super- 
numeraries. 

"I  take  exception  to  the  line  in  your 
letter  'unless  the  herd  is  further  depleted 
by  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries.'  The  herd- 
is  not  to  be  'depleted,'  as  the  females  are 
already  saved  for  15  years  by  the  cessation 
of  pelagic  sealing,  but  the  polygamous 
male  part  of  the  herd  must  be  depleted 
(to  quote  your  word  again)  if  you  propose 
to  mature  all  your  annual  crop  of  infant 
seals.  Nature  will  do  the  depleting  if 
you  don't,  and  half  the  loss  will  be  female 
pups. 

The  fact  is  that  the  innocent  Camp  Fire 
Club  is  being  used  by  the  unscrupulous 
lobby  which  has  always  been  kept  at 
work  by  the  pelagic  sealers.  One  excuse 
suits  it  as  well  as  another;  this  time  it  is 
the  killing  of  surplus  males.  It  is  a  pity 
that  year  after  year  it  should  succeed  in 
getting  the  support  of  men  of  good  stand- 
ing who  happen  to  be  ignorant  of  the  real 
facts  involved. 

C.  H.  TOWNSEND, 

Member  Advisory  Board  Fur  Seal  Service. 
(Hearing  No.  10:  pp.  597-598,  Apr.  25, 


But  Evermann  did  not  know 
that  Lucas  would  soon  be  obliged 
to  deny  that  trampled-pup  fiction. 


The  CHAIRMAN.  About  how  many  days? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  About  50  days  in  1896,  al- 
lowing about  9  days'  time  spent  at  sea, 
going  to  and  from  one  island  to  another. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  1897  how  many  days 
were  you  on  the  islands? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  About  42  days. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  On  the  islands? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  That  is  about  the  number. 
I  have  the  exact  data  right  here. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  Dr.  Lucas,  did  you 
see  up  there  a  pup  trampled  to  death  by 
a  bull? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  know  there  is  a  re- 
port of  some  46  pages  with  your  name 
associated  with  Dr.  Jordan  as  one  of  the 
distinguished  scientists  who  had  made  this 
close  study  of  the  seals  that  summer. 
Now,  in  1897,  you  discovered  those  pups 
were  not  trampled  to  death,  didn't  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  The  greater  part  of  them. 
Yes;  we  revised  our  causes  of  the  previous 
year. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Who  revised  them? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  did  most  of  it,  because  I 
was  the  one  on  whom  devolved  this  re- 
port on  the  causes  of  mortality.  (Hearim 
No.  12,  pp.  719,  720,  May  16,  1912.) 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


179 


Evermann  takes  Hornaday  to 
task  for  expression  of  opinion ;  for 
lack  of  experience  unfits  him— 

DR.    HORXADAY'S   STATEMENTS   REGARD- 
IX i;  THE  NATURAL  HISTORY  OF  THE  FUR 

SEAL. 

Dr.  EVERMAXX:  It  is  with  extreme  re- 
luctance that  I  venture  to  .call  attention 
to  what  I  believe  to  be  fundamental  mis- 
takes in  Dr.  Hornaday's  testimony  before 
this  committee  and  the  Senate  Committee 
on  Conservation  of  National  Resources. 
Dr.  Hornaday  and  I  are  good  friends,  and 
have  been  such  for  many  years.  I  fully 
appreciate  the  splendid  work  he  has  done 
as  director  of  the  New  York  Zoological 
Park  and  his  interesting  contributions  to 
popular  natural  history  literature.  I 
realize,  however,  that  "in  this  fur-seal 
matter  he  has  relied  chiefly  upon  Mr. 
Elliott  for  his  data.  Dr.  Hornaday  ad- 
mitted before  this  committee  that  he  had 
never  been  on  the  seal  islands;  that  he 
had  never  seen  a  fur-seal  herd:  that  he 
had  never  seen  a  live  fur  seal  except  the 
two  now  at  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  and 
the  one  in  the  New  York  Aquarium  fur- 
nished it  by  the  United  States  Bureau  of 
Fisheries:  and.  moreover,  that  he  does  not 
claim  to  be  an  expert  on  the  life  history 
of  the  fur  seal.  He  even  admits  that  he 
does  ' '  not  pose  as  ha  vine:  expert  informa- 
tion of  that  kind''  and  that  his  "interest 
in  that  phase  of  the  subject  is  largely 
academic."  Those  statements  are  en- 
tirely frank  and  fair.  One  who  has  never 
been  on  the  seal  islands  or  who  has  not 
seen  considerable  numbers  of  fur  seals 
can  not  possess  any  knowledge  of  the  sub- 
ject. Knowledge  is  acquired  only  through 
personal  experience:  this  Dr.  Hornaday 
has  not  had .  The  life  history  of  an  animal 
can  be  studied  only  by  observing  the 
animals  themselves;  this  Dr.  Hornaday 
has  had  no  opportunity  to  do.  The  most 
that  he  can  have  is  information,  and  that 
will  be  reliable  and  of  value  only  if  ob- 
tained from  trustworthy  sources.  (Hear- 
ing Xo.  10,  pp.  601,  602,  Apr.  25.  1902.) 

Evermann  quotes  22  men  in 
support  of  a  self-confessed  bio- 
logical untruth. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Here  we  have  a  list  of 
more  than  a  dozen  naturalists,  practically 
all  of  whom  are  men  of  international  repu- 
tation and  all  of  whom  are  known  as  men 
of  education,  intelligence,  and  unim- 
peachable character.  Then  there  is  an 
equal  number  of  careful  business  men  of 
unquestioned  honesty  and  ability. 

These  22  men  are  all  men  of  ability  and 
integrity.  Each  and  every  one  of  them 


But,  it  soon  develops  that 
Evermann  himself  lacks  experi- 
ence in  the  same  premises. 

STATEMENT  OF  DR.  BARTON  W.  EVER- 
MANN, CHIEF,  ALASKA  FISHERIES  SERV- 
ICE. BUREAU'  OF  FISHERIES. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Dr.  Evermann,  when  did 
you  first  go  to  the  seat  islands? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  In  the  spring  of  1892. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  did  you  land  there? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  do  not  recall  the 
exact  date  when  I  landed  on  either  of  the 
islands. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Do  you  know  the  month? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  It  was  either  July  or 
August. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Was  that  your  first  land- 
ing? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Yes. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Which  island  did  you 
land  on? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  first  landed  on  St. 
Paul,  and  later  I  went  to  St.  George. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  About  what  time  did  you 
land  on  St.  Paul? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Some  time  in  July  or 
August. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  long  did  you  stay 
there? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Only  a  few  days. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  do  you  mean  by  a 
"few  days"? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  The  exact  number  of 
days  I  can  not  recall. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Was  it  two  days? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  It  was  about  a  week 
or  10  days.  (I  have  since  consulted  the 
record;  I  find  I  was  on  the  Pribilof 
Islands  continuously  from  July  19  to 
July  31.)  (Hearing  No.  10,  p.  621,  Apr. 
25,  1912.) 


Elliott  exposes  the  deceit  prac- 
tised by  Evermann  in  asserting 
that  untruth. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Just  make  a  note  that 
the  statement  will  be  found  in  hearing 
No.  3  at  page  so-and-so. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Hearing  No.  3,  page  155. 
It  is  in  connection  with  a  "comparison  of 
the  proposed  lease  of  the  seal  islands  with 
the  present  lease,"  and  under  section  4 
these  words  occur: 

'"The  lease  should  be  renewed.  It  is 
foolish  to  abolish  killing  on  land  while 


180 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


has  seen  the  fur-seal  herd,  has  made  a 
study  of  the  various  problems  involved  in 
its  proper  management,  and  they  are 
unanimously  agreed  on  the  following 
propositions: 

5.  The  surplus  males  should  be  killed 
before  they  reach  the  age  of  5  years,  be- 
cause when  they  have  attained  that  age 
their  skins   become  relatively   of  little 
value. 

6.  If  the  surplus  males  are  not  killed 
they  not  only  become  valueless  for  their 
skins,  but  they  grow  up  into  bulls  not 
needed  for  breeding  purposes,  but  which 
nevertheless   pass   on    to   the   rookeries, 
where  they  do  great  damage  to  the  breed- 
ing herd  by  fighting  among  themselves 
for  possession  of  the  cows,  often  tearing 
the  cows  to  pieces,  so  injuring  them  that 
many  of  their  pups  are  still-born,  tramp- 
ling the  helpless  pups  to  death,  exhaust- 
ing their  own  vitality  and  virility,  and 
rendering   themselves   less   potent   than 
they    would    be    without    such    useless 
struggle — in  short,  causing  infinite  trouble 
and  injury  to  the  rookeries  without  a 
single  compensating  advantage. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Does  that  involve  the 
conclusion  of  anyone  else?  Are  those 
conclusions  of  your  own  based — 

Dr.  EVERMANN  (interposing).  No;  those 
are  the  conclusions  of  these  twenty-odd 
people,  whose  names  I  have  read.  Now, 
on  the  other  side,  against  those  22,  we  will 
place  Mr.  Elliott,  and  Mr.  Elliott  alone. 
(Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  520,  521,  Apr.  24, 
1912.) 

Evermann  swears  a  salted  seal- 
skin shrinks  6  inches  from  its 
green  length. 


Mr.  McGuiRE.  I  would  like  a  little 
more  light  with  reference  to  this  first  skin. 
The  seal,  as  I  understand  it,  measured  43^ 
inches. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Yes. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Those  are  your  figures? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Those  are  the  official 
measurements  made  by  the  agents  of  the 
Government? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  The  skin  now,  not  when 
it  was  taken  from  the  seal,  but  now,  in  a 
salted  condition,  measures  34^  inches. 
Am  I  right  about  that? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Now,  you  asked  Mr. 
Elliott  to  state  from  those  measurements 
the  age  of  that  seal. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  And  he,  as  he  stated, 
taking  Lampson  &  Co. 's  figures  as  a  basis, 
stated  that  it  was  a  yearling? 


seals  are  being  killed  in  the  water.  Cessa- 
tion of  killing  on  land  means  encourage- 
ment to  pelagic  sealing.  Should  pelagic 
or  sea  killing  be  abolished,  it  might  be 
well  to  have  a  closed  season  on  land  as 
well  as  to  allow  the  herd  to  recuperate." 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Who  says  this? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  Bureau  of  Fisheries, 
the  advisory  board,  and  the  whole  scien- 
tific aggregation — "a  closed  season  to 
allow  the  herd  to  recuperate,"  whereas 
they  now  claim  there  will  be  "trampled 
pups"  and  "torn  females"  if  they  are 
allowed  "to  recuperate"  during  "a  closed 
season."  These  men  have  conjured  up 
that  story,  and  it  is  faked.  It  is  not 
published  in  any  official  document;  no 
man,  from  Dr.  Jordan  down  to  the  smallest 
one  of  his  associates,  has  published  such 
a  statement  in  all  of  their  official  reports 
up  to  1909.  It  is  only  recently,  in  a  com- 
munication from  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries 
to  the  Senate,  that  they  now  say,  as 
"scientists,"  if  these  animals  are  allowed 
to  grow  up  there  in  a  closed  season  they 
will  go  onto  the  rookeries  and  "fight  and 
tear  the  females  to  pieces  and  trample  the 
young  to  death." 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Well,  we  have  had 
that  before. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  have  never  had  this 
unwitting  self-confession  of  utter  insin- 
cerity before;  this  is  the  first  you  have 
had  it,  so  confessed  by  them,  brought  to 
your  attention.  (Hearing  No.  14,  pp. 
970,  971,  July  29,  1912.) 

But  in  a  sworn  deposition  nine 
native  sealers  say  that  properly 
salted  sealskins  do  not  shrink  un- 
der the  green  lengths. 

ST.  PAUL  ISLAND,  ALASKA, 

Town  Hall,  July  24,  1913. 

Question.  Did  you  drive  and  kill  seals 
last  summer? 

Answer.  Yes. 

Question.  How  large  were  they? 

Answer.  We  killed  them  by  ages  as  we 
killed  them  before.  Mr.  Lembkey  was 
the  Government  agent  and  Mr.  G.  A. 
Clark  was  counting  the  seals.  When  we 
were  salting  skins  last  year,  Mr.  Clark  did 
not  allow  us  to  stretch  the  skins  as  we 
always  have  done  and  do  when  spreading 
them  in  the  trench  as  we  salt  them.  We 
stretch  them  out  about  2  or  3  inches  as  we 
spread  them,  then  put  salt  on  them,  and 
then  they  shrink  back  into  their  natural 
shape.  (Native  sealers'  deposition  to 
Agents  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and 
Labor,  July  24,  .1913,  pp.  93-95;  Rep't 
said  agents,  Aug.  31,  1913.) 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  attempted  to 
state  that  in  measuring  a  green  skin  it  is 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


181 


Dr.  EVERMANN.  Yes,  sir.  (Hearing 
No.  10;  p.  531;  Apr.  24,  1912.) 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  when  you  remove 
this  skin  you  leave  how  much  on  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  suppose  about  3  to  3£ 
inches. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No  more? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  \Ve  take  off  as  much 
skin  as  we  can.  It  is  my  impression  that 
we  do  not  leave  more  than  3  inches.  I 
have  stated  that  repeatedly  to  the  com- 
mittee. (Hearing  No.  9,  p.  443,  Apr.  13, 
1912.) 


Evermann  swears  that  salting 
a  sealskin  decreases  its  weight; 
he  submits  " proof  "  of  it: 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  Last  year,  when  Mr.  M. 
€.  Marsh,  naturalist,  fur-seal  service,  went 
to  the  Pribilof  Islands,  he  was  instructed 
to  make  certain  investigations,  one  of 
which  was  to  determine  by  actual  experi- 
ment the  effect  that  salting  has  upon  the 
weight  of  far-seal  skins.  He  made  a  very 
careful  investigation  of  the  matter,  and 
his  report  has  just  been  received.  It  is 
so  interesting  and  valuable  that  I  wish  to 
put  it  in  tlie  record.  His  investigation 
settles  the  question  conclusively  and  for 
all  time.  It  shows  that  salting  causes 
fur-seal  skins  to  lose  weight.  The  report 
is  as  follows: 

"The  average  loss  of  weight  for  the  whole 
60  skins  is 0.63  pound,  or  10  ounces.  This 
is  an  understatement  of  the  average  loss  of 
weight,  which,  I  believe,  is  at  least  an 
ounce  greater.  The  reason  is  that  it  is 
practically  impossible  to  mechanically  re- 
move all  the  salt  from  the  skins  before 
reweighing.  They  were  shaken,  swept, 
and  brushed,  but  a  few  grains  and  crystals 
of  salt  were  always  left  adhering  to  each 
side  of  the  skin.  Obviously  it  would  not 
do  to  wash  them  off.  By  more  carefully 
cleaning  a  few  of  the  re  weighed  skins  and 
then  again  weighing  them,  I  estimate  this 
residual  salt  to  average  an  ounce  or  some- 
thing more. 

"The  careful  identification  of  every  skin 
and  the  care  given  to  every  detail  of  the 
weighing  make  it  quite  certain  that  the 
salting  of  sealskins  as  practiced  on  St. 
Paul  Island  subtracts  materially  from  its 
original  weight  when  freshly  skinned. 
Presumably,  though  not  necessarily,  the 
London  weights  reported  are  less  than  the 
actual  weights  of  the  skins  at  the  island 
killings.  If  any  change  takes  place  dur- 
ing transportation  to  London,  it  is  likely 
to  be  a  further  loss,  and  if  the  London 


impossible  to  find  out  its  exact  length 
when  you  lay  it  on  the  ground,  because  it 
may  curl  up,  or  roll,  or  stretch,  and  it  can 
only  be  measured  after  it  has  become  har- 
dened by  salt. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  Then  it  will  not 
stretch? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Certainly  not. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  That  is  the  proper 
time  to  measure  it,  after  it  has  become 
rigid  and  stiff? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  You  can  not  then 
stretch  or  shrink  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No,  sir.  (Hearing  No. 
9,  pp.  399,  400,  Mar.  1,  1912.) 

Chief  Special  Agent  Lembkey 
makes  an  official  record  of  fact 
which  exposes  the  trick  of  Ever- 
mann: 

Chief  Special  Agent  Lembkey  makes 
the  following  entry  on  page  149  of  the  jour- 
nal of  the  Government  agent  on  St.  Paul 
Island,  to  wit: 

SATURDAY,  July  23.  1904. 
On  July  18.  107  skins  taken  on  Tolstoi 
were  weighed  and  salted.  To-day  they 
were  hauled  out  of  the  trench  and  re- 
weighed.  At  the  time  of  killing  they 
weighed  705  pounds,  and  on  being  taken 
out  they  weighed  759^  pounds,  a  gain  in 
salting  of  54^  pounds,  or  one-half  pound 
per  skin.  (Report  Agents  H.  Com.  Exp. 
Dep.  Com.,  Aug.  3L  1913,  p.  112.) 


182 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


weights  deal  with  the  skin  in  the  condi- 
tion in  which  it  arrives,  freed  of  most  of 
the  salt  about  which  it  is  wrapped,  a  loss, 
compared  with  the  fresh  weight,  almost 
without  exception,  will  appear."  (Hear- 
ing No.  14.  pp.  974,  975.  July  29, 1912.) 

Evermann  and  his  "scientific" 
associates  declare  that  the  fur- 
seal  breeding  nuclus  of  50,000 
cows  will  require  eight  years  in 
which  to  double  itself: 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then,  with  this  testimony 
in  his  hands,  Mr.  W.  I.  Lembkey  and  his 
associates  in  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  went 
before  the  House  Committee  on  Foreign 
Affairs,  January  3, 1912,  and  the  following 
statement  was  then  made  that  day  to  this 
committee  by  Mr.  Lembkey,  to  wit  (pp. 
40,  41,  hearings  on  H.  R.  16571,  Jan.  3,  4, 
1912): 

"The  CHAIRMAN  .  Assuming,  Mr.  Lemb- 
key, that  there  was  a  closed  season  on  the 
Pribilof  herd  for  a  period  of  10  years,  what, 
in  your  opinion,  would  be  the  number  in 
the  herd  at  the  expiration  of  that  time? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  regret  to  state  that 
the  increase  would  not  be  as  phenomenal 
as  has  been  held  out  before  this  and  other 
committees.  As  nearly  as  I  can  approxi- 
mate it,  the  increase  in  seal  life  which 
would  result  from  an  absolute  cessation  of 
pelagic  sealing  would  equal  100  per  cent 
every  nine  years.  That  is  to  say,  the  herd 
would  double  itself  every  nine  years.  I 
am  willing  to  say  eight  years.  We  will 
say  the  herd  will  double  itself  every  eight 
years.  Now,  if  we  should  start  in  1911 
with  approximately  50,000  breeding  fe- 
males, in  1919  we  would  have  100,000 
breeding  females,  representing  an  increase 
of  100  per  cent  within  a  period  of  eight 
years.  During  the  next  eight  years,  how- 
ever, the  100,000  breeding  females  would 
increase  to  200,000,  representing  a  net  in- 
crease in  the  period  of  16  years  of  150,000 
breeding  females,  and,  of  course,  the  next 
eight  years  would  see  400,000  breeding 
females  in  the  herd.  While  they  would 
increase  at  the  same  ratio,  the  numerical 
increase  would  be  much  greater  as  the 
herd  became  larger. 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  That  applies  to  both 
the  males  and  females? 


Elliott  follows  with  table  of  in- 
crease, which  declares  that  50,000 
breeding  nucleus  will  double  itself 
in  five  years,  and  that  total, 
100,000,  will  double  itself  in  the 
next  four  years,  and  so  on : 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  As  Mr.  Lembkey  did  not 
finish  his  statement  in  general,  and  was 
followed  immediately  by  Dr.  Evermann, 
I  did  not  get  in  my  answer  to  it  until  the 
next  day's  session .  In  due  time  I  reached 
it,  and  took  this  particular  question  up  as 
follows;  see  pages  98  to  101,  inclusive, 
hearings  on  H.  R.  16571.  Now,  gentle- 
men, I  am  going  to  read  this  to  you  and 
ask  that  you  interrupt  me,  and  where  you 
think  I  am  not  clear,  for  here  is  the  crux 
of  the  business: 

"I  will  now  show  you  a  table,  Exhibit 
F,  which  will  surprise  you.  Yesterday 
the  representative  of  the  Bureau  of  Fish- 
eries, and  the  scientists  behind  them,  told 
you  it  will  take  eight  years  to  double  the 
50,000  females  now  surviving.  You  heard 
that  statement  that  it  would  take  eight 
years,  and  then  another  eight  years  would 
ensue  before  we  had  200,000  cows.  Why, 
the  assumption  was  so  transparently 
foolish  that  even  the  chairman,  who  had 
never  given  it  a  thought,  at  once  began  to 
pick  it  to  pieces .  Let  me  submit  to  you  a 
statement  of  annual  increase  from  a 
nucleus  of  50,000  breeding  female  seals  on 
the  Pribilof  rookeries,  which  will  follow  a 
complete  cessation  of  killing  male  seals 
thereon,  provided  that  that  rest  dates 
from  February  1,  1912,  or  from  and  after 
the  passage  of  this  act,  and  is  not  broken 
until  the  1st  of  February,  1928,  being  a 
close  time  of  15  years.  This  suspension  of 
all  such  killing  as  above  cited  will  enable 
the  only  power  to  operate,  which  is  the 
natural  law  governing  this  life,  and  which 
alone  can  effect  that  restoration,  and  full 
restoration,  to  a  safe  annual  rate  of  increase 
which  will  permit  an  annual  killing  indefi- 
nitely into  the  future  of  from  60,000  to 
80,000  choice  surplus  male  seals  on  and 


FUR-SEAT    HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


183 


'•Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes, sir.  The  increase 
will  be  in  the  nature  of  about  100  per  cent 
every  eight  years." 

You  see,  they  could  see  through  this 
crude,  almost  stupid,  proposition  that  this 
herd  would  not  double  itself  except  once 
every  eight  years.  (Hearing  No.  14,  p. 
1002,  July  29,  1912.) 


after  the  opening  of  the  season  of  1928; 
and  this  killing  then  done  without  the 
slightest  injury  to  its  annual  birth  rate 
thereafter  on  the  breeding  grounds." 


Year. 

Breeding 
cows. 

NubUes. 

Pups 
(males). 

Pups 
(females). 

1911.    ... 
1912.    ... 

50,000 
54,000 

10,000 
10,000 

25,000 
27,000 

25,000 
27,000 

1913.    ... 

57,600 

15,750 

28,800 

28,800 

1914.    ... 

66,870 

24,300 

33,435 

33,435 

1915.    ... 

74,358 

26,000 

37,  179 

37,179 

1916.    . 

88,793 

30,092 

44,396 

44,396 

1917.    ... 

103,314 

33,462 

56,657 

56,657 

1918.    ... 

120,066 

42,163 

65,033 

65,033 

1919.    . 

145,997 

46,496 

77,998 

77,998 

1920.    ... 

192,000 

57,100 

96,000 

96,000 

1921.    ... 

225,000 

58,000 

112,000 

112,000 

1922.    ... 

2*0.  non 

61,000 

130,000 

130,000 

1923.    ... 

321,000 

74,000 

165,000 

165,000 

1924.    ... 

395,000 

100,000 

197,000 

197,000 

1925.    ... 

450,000 

162,000 

275,000 

225,000 

1926.    ... 

612,000 

200,000 

306,000 

306,000 

1*27.    ... 

800,000 

200,000 

400,000 

400,000 

Year. 

Yearlings 
(males 

2-year- 
olds 

3-year- 
olds 

4-year- 
olds 

and 
females). 

(males). 

(males). 

(males). 

1911 

1912 

35  000 

1913.    . 

37,800 

15,750 

1914 

40,320 

24  300 

14,180 

1915.    .!. 

46,808 

26,000 

21,870 

12,762 

3916.    ... 

52,052 

30,002 

23,600 

19,683 

1917.    ... 

62,156 

33,462 

27,000 

21,240 

1918.    ... 

72,983 

42,163 

30,000 

25,000 

1919.    ... 

92,830 

46,496 

38,000 

28,000 

1920.    ... 

104,000 

50,100 

40,000 

35,000 

1921.    ... 

135,000 

58,000 

46,000 

36,000 

1922.    ... 

165,000 

61,000 

52,000 

40,000 

1923.    . 

200,000 

74,000 

57,000 

45,000 

1924.    ... 

231,000 

100,000 

68,000 

50,000 

1925.    ... 

350,000 

162.000 

85,000 

57,000 

1926.    ... 

400,000 

200,000 

140,000 

65,000 

1927.    ... 

450,000 

200,000 

165,000 

80,000 

(Hearing No.  14,  pp.  1004, 1005,  July  29, 
1913.) 


184 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Evermann  and  his  associates 
attempt  a  " correction"  of  El- 
liott's table. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  would  state  that  this 
has  been  brought  in  by  Mr.  Elliott  to  show 
some  point  which  he  wished  to  make,  and 
I  wish  to  show  how  very  cautious  any  com- 
mittee must  be  in  accepting  facts,  alleged 
facts,  or  figures  submitted  to  it  by  Mr. 
Elliott.  Where  he  got  800,000  cows  in 
1927,  that  method  of  computation  will 
give  only  303,371. 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE 

AND  LABOR,  BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 

Washington.  January  18,  1912. 
Hon.  W.  S.  GOODWIN, 

House  of  Representatives, 

Washington,  D.  C. 

SIR:  Referring  to  the  table  submitted 
by  Henry  W.  Elliott  to  the  Committee  on 
Foreign  Affairs  at  the  hearing  on  January 
4,  1912,  and  printed  on  page  99  of  the  hear- 
ings, showing  the  prospective  increase  in 
the  seal  herd  of  the  Pribilof  Islands.  I  have 
the  honor  to  advise  that  a  critical  exami- 
nation of  this  table  shows  such  serious  er-. 
rors  in  computation  and  such  glaring  dis- 
crepancies as  to  render  the  table  unreli- 
able and  wholly  misleading.  The  bureau 
transmits  herewith  a  copy  of  Elliott's  fig- 
ures for  breeding  cows,  nubiles,  and  fe- 
male pups,  with  the  correct  computations 
in  parallel  columns,  so  that  the  nature  of 
the  discrepancies  can  be  seen  at  a  glance. 
The  corrected  figures  have  been  arrived  at 
throughout  by  using  Elliott's  own  basis  of 
computation.  Some  of  the  errors  are  so 
palpable  as  to  be  readily  apparent  to  the 
cpmmittee.  The  prospective  number  of 
breeding  cows  in  the  herd  in  1 927  is  shown 
to  be  303,371,  whereas  Elliott  claims  that 
there  will  then  exist  800,000  breeding 
cows. 

If  the  committee  consider  it  worth  while 
to  have  a  hearing  on  this  matter,  the  bu- 
reau will  be  pleased  to  show  in  detail  the 
numerous  inaccuracies  in  Elliott's  table. 

By  direction  of  the  commissioner. 
Very  respectfully, 

H  M.  SMITH, 
Acting  Commissioner. 


But  Elliott  again  exposes  the 
nonsense  of  that  " correct"  table 
of  Evermann' s. 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C., 
January  18,  1912—6  p.  m. 
Hon.  WM.  SULZER, 

Chairman  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs. 

DEAR  SIR:  I  have  befoie  me  a  letter  ad- 
dressed to  a  member  of  your  committee 
from  Acting  Fish  Commissioner  H.  M. 
Smith,  dated  January  18,  1912.  He  in- 
forms Mr.  Sharp  that  he  has  been  in  labor 
during  the  last  two  weeks  over  my  table  of 
increase  to  the  small  nucleus  of  our  fur- 
seal  herd,  which  I  gave  to  your  committee 
in  his  presence  January  4  last.  He  says 
that  he  now  finds  this  table  of  mine  full  of 
"serious  errors,"  "glaring,"  etc.,  and  in- 
closes "a  scientific"  "correction"  of  it — 
"Montes  parieunter,  ridiculus  mus." 

Mr.  Smith  and  his  "scientific"  asso- 
ciates belong  to  that  class  of  men  who  can 
see  a  fly  on  a  barn  door,  but  who  can  not 
see  the  door.  Let  me,  therefore,  present 
that  problem  of  increase  for  that  herd  to 
you  in  another  form,  as  I  would  have  done 
January  4  last  had  Mr.  Smith  then  at- 
tempted the  least  denial  of  my  table  given 
you  then.  It  can  be  done  very  briefly 
and  clearly,  to  wit: 

We  start  in  July,  this  year,  with  50,000 
breeding  "cow"  seals;  during  this  July 
coming  they  will  add  25,000  pup  "cow- 
seals  "  to  their  breeding  strength,  or  50  per 
cent  increase  of  it.  But,  we  subtract, 
from  that  50  per  cent  of  increase  a  loss  of  30 
per  cent  due  to  natural  causes  during  the 
interval  of  its  birth  in  1912  and  its  reap- 
pearance on  the  islands  in  1913,  as  "year- 
ling" cow  seals.  Then,  the  loss  of  this 
"yearling  "  cow-seal  life  during  the  season 
of  1913,  and  its  reappearance  as  a  breeding 
or  "nubile"  life,  is  not  to  exceed  2  per 
cent,  and  that  adds  18  per  cent  net  in- 
crease of  breeding  strength  by  the  opening 
of  the  season  of  1914.  This  net  annual 
increase  of  18  per  cent  over  all  natural  loss 
will  hold  good  for  the  next  15  years,  be- 
cause this  is  a  newborn  increase  from 
1912 — all  young  cows,  the  oldest  of  them 
in  1927  not  over  15  years. 

What  is  the  sum  of  $50,000  at  18  per  cent 
annual  interest  compounded  for  15  years? 
Therefore,  you  observe,  I  have  not  misled 
you. 

I  am,  very  respectfully,  your  obe- 
dient servant, 

HENRY  H.  ELLIOTT. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


185 


Table  shoving  proapt'ctii'e  increase  in  Pribi- 
lofseal  herd  from  191 J  to  79^7,  submittnl 
by  Henry  IT.  KUiott,  n-ith  correct  compu- 
tations in  parallel  columns. 


Year. 

Breeding  cows. 

Elliott. 

Correct. 

1911.. 

50,000 
54,000 
57,600 
66,870 
74,358 
88,793 
103,314 
120,066 
145,997 
192,000 
225,000 
260,000 
321,000 
395,000 
450,000 
612,000 
800,000 

50,000 
54,000 
57,600 
66,015 
74,  723 
83,580 
93,938 
105,728 
118,852 
133,  598 
150,213 
168,887 
189,  874 
213,473 
240,005 
269,834 
303,371 

1912 

1913 

1914..    . 

1915 

1916... 

1917 

1918 

1919  

1920. 

1921 

1922  

1923 

1924  

1925  

1926 

1927  

Year. 

Nubiles. 

Elliott. 

Correct. 

1911.. 

10,000 
10,000 
15,750 
24,300 
26,000 
30,092 
33,462 
42,  163 
46,496 
57,100 
58,000 
61,000 
74,000 
100,000 
162,000 
200,000 
200,000 

10,000 
10,000 
15.750 
17,010 
18,  144 
20,795 
23,538 
26,328 
29,590 
33,304 
37,  439 
42,084 
47,317 
53,199 
59,  810 
67,  244 
75,601 

1912. 

1913 

1914  

1915 

1916  

1917... 

1918 

1919  

1920 

1921  .  . 

1922.    . 

1923 

1924  

1925 

1926... 

1927  

Year. 

Female  pups. 

Elliott. 

Correct. 

1911.. 

25,000 
27,000 
28,800 
33,  435 
37,  179 
44,396 
56,657 
65,033 
77  998 

25,000 
27,000 
28,800 
33,008 
37,362 
41,790 
46,969 
52,864 
59,426 
66,799 
75,106 
84,  443 
94,937 
106,  736 
120,002 
134,917 
151,685 

1912. 

1913 

1914  

1915 

1916... 

1917.. 

1918 

1919  

1920 

96,000 
112,000 
130,000 
165,000 
197,000 
225,000 
306,000 
400,000 

1921 

1922  

1923 

1924  .  .  . 

1925.. 

1926 

1927  

THE  RIGGS  NATIONAL 

BANK  OF  WASHINGTON', 
Washington,  D.  C.,  January  31,  1912. 
Mr.  HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT, 

Room  423,  Senate  Office  Building. 

Washington,  D.  C. 

DEAR  SIR:  In  the  absence  of  Mr.  Glover, 
who  has  been  confined  to  his  home  by  ill- 
ness for  several  days,  I  am  taking  the  lib- 
erty of  replying  to  your  letter  of  the  29th 
instant,  addressed  to  him.  We  have  made 
the  calculation  indicated  on  the  inclosed 
slip,  by  the  use  of  five  space  logarithm  ta- 
bles, and  the  result  is  $598,642.857. 
Very  truly,  yours, 

HENRY  H.  FLATHER, 

Cashier. 

(Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  591,  592,  Apr.  24, 
1912.) 


(Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  590,  591,  Apr.  24, 
1912.) 


186 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


Evermann  misquotes  authen- 
tic testimony  to  support  idle  and 
baseless  statements  in  re  loss  of 
life  to  seal  herd: 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  It  is  admitted  by 
practically  everyone  that  not  more  than 
1  in  5  of  those  fatally  wounded  is 
secured  by  the  pelagic  sealers.  Mr. 
Elliott  himself  has  stated  that,  in  his 
judgment,  not  more  than  1  in  10  is 
recovered.  But  let  us  use  the  more  con- 
servative estimate.  The  number  secured 
by  the  pelagic  sealers  in  the  eight  years 
from  1890  to  1897  was  635,739.  Accept- 
ing 1  to  5  as  the  proper  ratio  of  seals 
secured  to  seals  killed  by  the  pelagic 
sealers,  the  number  mortally  wounded 
and  not  recovered  was  2,542,950:  and  the 
total  number  killed  was  3,178,695  seals. 

And  at  least  80  per  cent  of  these,  or 
2,542,956,  were  females.  Or,  if  we  accept 
Mr.  Elliott's  ratio  of  number  lost  to  num- 
ber secured,  the  number  killed  was 
6,357,390,  of  which  3,085,912  were 
females. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Elliott  .said  nobody 
could  fix  a  ratio;  it  is  ridiculous. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  *  Mr.  Elliott 

says  that  not  more  than  1  in  10  is  secured . 
(P.  141,  Committee  Merchant  Marine  and 
Fisheries,  hearing,  June  8,  1888.) 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  do  not  say  anything  of 
the  kind.  It  is  an  absurd,  ridiculous 
assertion  repeatedly  repeated  here. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  One  minule. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  won't  let  a  man  sit 
there  as  a  scientist  and  utter  falsehoods 
here. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  The  remark — 

Mr.  ELLIOTT  (interposing).  You  can 
not  find  it.  I  said  this:  The  idea  of  esti- 
mating loss  at  sea  was  a  pipe  dream;  no 
man  knew  what  was  lost.  (Hearing  No. 
10,  pp.  523-525,  Apr.  20,  1912.) 

Evermann  attempts  to  justify 
fraud  on  the  seal  islands  to  the 
committee : 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  An  examination  of 
Mr.  Elliott's  report  on  his  work  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands  in  1890,  published  in 
June,  1896,  shows  that  he  kept  a  diary  or 
journal  in  which  he  recorded  his  daily 
observations  and  field  notes.  This  record 
appears  to  have  been  very  carefully  kept. 
On  pages  181  and  182  I  find  his  entry  for 
July  7,  1890.  You  should  examine  this 
entry.  I  have  read  it  carefully,  and  I 
fail  to  find  in  it  any  mention  whatever  of 
the  killing  of  female  seals.  If  Mr.  Elliott 
discovered  on  that  date  that  the  agents 
were  permitting  the  lessees  to  kill  female 
seals,  and  if  he  had  with  the  lessees'  agent 
and  the  Government  agent  the  heated 


Evermann  is  compelled  to  read 
the  testimony  which  he  had 
misquoted : 


The  CHAIRMAN.  Wheie  was  the  testi- 
mony adduced? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  June  8,  1888.  Commit- 
tee on  Merchant  Marine  and  l;i.<heriesr 
page  140.  (Beading): 

••Shooting  fur  seals  in  the  open  waters 
of  the  sea  or  ocean  with  the  peculiar  shot 
and  bullet  cartridges  used  involves  an 
immense  waste  of  seal  life.  P^very  seal 
that  is  merely  wounded,  and  even  if 
mortally  wounded ,  at  the  moment  of  shoot- 
ing dives  and  swims  away  instantly,  to 
perish  at  some  point  far  distant  and  to  be 
never  again  seen  by  its  human  enemies; 
it  is  ultimately  destroyed,  but  it  is  lost, 
in  so  far  as  the  hunters  are  concerned .  If 
the  seal  is  shot  dead  instantly,  killed  in- 
stantly, then  it  can  be  picked  up  in  most 
every  case:  but  not  1  seal  in  10  fired  at 
by  the  most  skillful  maiine  hunters  is  so 
shot,  and  nearly  every  seal  in  this  10  will 
have  been  wounded,  many  of  them 
fatally.  The  irregular  tumbling  of  the 
water  around  the  seal  and  the  irregular 
heaving  of  the  hunter's  boat,  both  acting 
at  the  same  moment  entirely  independent 
of  each  other,  make  the  difficulty  of  tak- 
ing an  accurate  aim  exceedingly  great  and 
the  result  of  clean  killing  very  slender." 
(Pp.  140-141.) 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Is  it  there  where  you  say 
I  say  10,  and  only  1  recovered? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  read  the  testimony. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  But  you  know  I  do  not 
say  that. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  The  committee  will 
pass  upon  that. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Very  well;  I  am  satisfied. 
(Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  527-529,  Apr.  20, 
1912.1 

But,  the  fraud  is  at  once  ex- 
posed to  the  committee : 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  the  first  place,  all 
those  affidavits  he  has  cited  must  have 
been  made  after  the  14th  of  August,  1890. 
They  were  made  by  the  employees  of  the 
North  American  Commercial  Co.  under 
pressure  from  George  R.  Tingle,  who  also 
signed  one  of  them;  they  were  supple- 
mented by  a  letter  to  Secretary  Charles 
Foster,  from  Capt.  Michael  Healey,  United 
States  Revenue  Marine  Service,  who 
touched  at  the  islands  in  October,  1890, 
and  who  wrote  to  Foster  about  the '  'seals, 
being  as  numerous  then  as  they  had  ever 
appeared  to  him  in  all  previous  years." 
(Think  of  such  a  statement  from  such  a 
man,  who  knew  so  little!) 


PUB-SEAL  HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


187 


controversy  to  which  he  refers  in  his  letter 
to  Mr.  Windom,  does  it  not  look  strange 
that  he  makes  no  mention  whatever  of  the 
matter  in  his  diary?  It  seems  almost  in- 
conceivable that  so  important  a  matter  as 
the  unlawful  killing  of  female  seals  should 
not  have  been  recorded  at  the  time. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  It  is  recorded  in  the 
Treasury  Department. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Not  until  two  months 
later  does  he  put  the  matter  on  record. 
He  has  explained  why  he  did  not  embody 
this  information  in  his  final  report  to  Mr. 
Windom,  but  that  does  not  explain  why 
it  is  not  even  hinted  at  in  his '  'Daily  field 
notes,"  which,  he  states,  are  given  in 
extenso  in  Section  VIII  of  his  1890  report. 

In  his  letter  to  Secretary  Windom  he 
claims  that  he  discovered  that  three  fe- 
males had  been  killed  and  straightway 
ordered  all  killing  stopped.  Because 
three  seals  had  been  killed  illegally  he 
stopped  all  killing.  Is  that  what  an 
an  efficient  and  fair-minded  agent  would 
have  done?  No;  not  at  all.  On  the  con- 
trary, an  intelligent  agent,  competent  to 
cope  with  the  situation,  would  have 
stopped  the  killing  of  females,  if  such 
were  being  killed,  but  would  have  con- 
tinued the  proper  killing  of  males,  just 
the  same.  No  one  except  Mr.  Elliott  has 
claimed  there  was  not  an  abundance  of 
killable  males.  Indeed,  Daniel  Webster, 
who  was  in  immediate  charge  of  the  kill- 
ings on  the  islands  for  more  than  20  years, 
and  the  chief,  Anton  Melovidov,  have 
both  stated  under  oath  that  60,000  good 
merchantable  skins  could  have  been  taken 
in  1890  without  any  injury  to  the  herd. 
These  respective  statements  follow. 

Here  is  a  copy  of  the  sworn  statement 
made  by  Daniel  Webster.  It  touches 
upon  several  matters.  They  are  all  more 
or  less  pertinent,  but  I  will  not  read  them 
all.  (Hearing  No.  10,  p.  489,  Apr.  19, 
1912.) 


Those '  'affidavits' '  were  simply  bogus — 
they  were  false  ab  initio.  They  were  re- 
ceived by  Mr.  Foster  on  April  3,  1891,  in 
this  Mills  letter  aforesaid,  and  then  what 
happened? 

On  or  about  the  5th  of  April  Mr.  Charles 
J.  Goff  was  called  into  Secretary  Charles 
Foster's  office  and  told  that  he  need  not 
concern  himself  with  the  seal-island  busi- 
ness any  further;  that  "the  department 
had  other  business  for  him  to  transact  at 
Montreal,"  Canada  (i.  e.,  looking  after 
immigration  cases).  Goff  was  directed  to 
proceed  there  forthwith  (and  he  did). 
No  complaint  againt  him  was  uttered  by 
Foster — just  called  him  in,  and  sent  him 
to  Montreal  in  the  '  'regular  order  of 
official  business' '  which  governs  all  the 
special  agents.  Goff  was  astonished;  he 
was  speechless,  but  obeyed. 

Now,  gentlemen,  what  happened?  We 
come  right  back  to  this  letter  of  Ogden 
Mills.  A  new  administration  took  charge 
March  4,  1895.  I  determined  to  get 
copies  of  those  '  'affidavits' '  which  Charles 
Foster  published  a  mention  of  in  the  New 
York  Tribune,  May  (9?),  1891,  as  his 
authority  for  that  suppression  of  my  re- 
port of  1890,  and  those  of  my  official  asso- 
ciates, Messrs.  Goff,  Murray,  Nettleton, 
and  Lavender. 

I  called  on  Secretary  John  G.  Carlisle 
of  the  Treasury.  He  evinced  the  live- 
liest interest  in  this  question  and  asked 
Assistant  Secretary  Charles  S.  Hamlin  to 
go  with  me  to  the  chief  supervising  special 
agent's  office  and  furnish  me  with  copies 
of  those  affidavits,  Capt.  Healey's  letter, 
etc. 

Did  we  find  those  affidavits  or  the 
Healey  letter?  No.  We  traced  them  out 
from  the  Ogden  Mills  letter  receipt  in 
April,  1891,  to  one  division  after  another, 
only  to  find  that  they  had  been  received, 
had  been  noted,  and  had  disappeared 
from  the  files  when  Charles  Foster  left  the 
Secretary's  office,  March  4,  1895. 

Why  were  those  '  'affidavits' '  and  that 
letter  of  Healey  removed  and  taken  from 
the  official  files  when  Charles  Foster  pub- 
lished notes  of  them  as  his  official  warrant 
for  suppressing  the  sworn  official  reports 
of  Charles  J.  Goff  and  his  three  assistants 
in  charge  of  the  seal  islands  for  1890,  and 
my  special  report  of  1890  to  Mr.  Windom, 
ordered  by  act  approved  April  5,  1890? 

Why?  Because  their  authors  had  per- 
jured themselves,  and  if  those '  'affidavits" 
had  been  in  the  hands  of  John  G.  Carlisle 
the  lessees  would  have  been  obliged,  in 
my  opinion,  by  Mr.  Carlisle  to  surrender 
their  lease.  That  is  why  they  were  ab- 
stracted by  or  with  the  full  knowledge 
and  consent  of  Charles  Foster,  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  on  or  some  time  before 
March  4,  1895.  Nobody  else  could  have 


188 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Evermann  prompting  Bowers 
to  deny  the  regulation  prohibit- 
ing the  killing  of  yearlings: 


Mr.  McGuiRE.  The  only  point  of  dif- 
ference, apparently,  between  youiself 
and  Dr.  Elliott  is  on  the  question  of  the 
age  of  the  seals  at  the  killing.  I  believe 
you  said  your  instructions  to  your  agents 
are  that  under  no  circumstances  are  seals 
to  be  killed  under  2  years  of  age? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  There  is  no  instruction 
to  that  effect  this  year;  there  was  none 
last  year  to  that  effect;  and  I  am  not 
aware  that  it  has  been  modified  in  any 
way;  but  there  is  an  understanding,  and 
there  is  a  statement  from  the  agent  to  the 
effect  that  no  seals  were  taken  under  2 
years  of  age.  Of  course,  you  understand 
we  are  operating  under  this  law  which  was 
passed  a  year  ago,  and  there  is  no  pro- 
vision in  that  giving  instructions  to  the 
agents  on  the  islands. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  I  understand  that  the 
regulations  of  1904,  with  respect  to  the 
ages,  have  not  been  modified  by  this  law; 
am  I  right  or  not? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Well,  I  am  not  suffici- 
ently versed  in  the  regulations  of  1904, 
and  I  can  not  recall  from  memory. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Well,  as  read  a  few  mo- 
ments ago,  the  statement  was  that  none 
were  to  be  killed  under  2  years  of  age,  and 
then  you  subsequently  stated  none  had 
been  killed  to  your  knowledge  under  2 
years  of  age. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  As  understood  from  the 
reports  submitted  to  us  by  agents  on  the 
islands,  and  we  adjudged  that,  to  some 
extent,  too,  by  the  weight  of  the  skins. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Do  you  know  now,  of 
your  own  knowledge,  whether  the  regu- 
lations of  1904.  with  respect  to  the  ages 
of  the  seals  at  the  time  of  killing,  have 
been  modified? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Well,  I  am  not  familiar 
with  those  regulations. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  New  regulations  are 
issued  every  year. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  can  not  recall  the  regu- 
lations of  1904,  because  I  can  not  recall 
having  read  the.  They  were  not  under 


removed  them  or  would  have  dared  to  do 
so,  as  I  was  told  by  the  Treasury  officials. 
Those  men  whose  names  were  signed 
to  these  bogus  '  'affidavits' '  as  inclosed  in 
that '  'Ogden  Mills' '  letter  above  cited  are 
all  dead  save  one.  That  survivor  of  this 
job  is  one  James  C.  Redpath.  He  has 
been  the  general  overseer  and  assistant 
general  manager  of  the  lessees  ever  since 
May  21,  1890,  up  to  the  hour  that  their 
lease  expired,  May  1,  1910.  (Hearing 
No.  10,  pp.  663,  665,  Apr.  24,  1912.) 

Secretary  Nagel  brings  Lemb- 
key  and  Evermann  to  swear 
February  4,  1911,  that  no  seals 
were  killed  under  2  years  of  age: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  We  want  that  distinctly 
understood.  We  want  to  find  out  where 
he  comes  in,  and  where  to  put  the  respon- 
sibility. Is  not  Mr.  Lembkey  responsible 
for  anything?  Did  he  not  get  his  orders 
from  you? 

Mr/  BOWERS.  He  gets  his  orders  from 
me  as  approved  by  the  Secretary. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  he  is  bound  by 
them? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  He  is. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then,  Mr.  Chairman,  I 
want  Mr.  Bowers  to  explain  right  here 
why  Mr.  Lembkey,  introduced  by  Secre- 
tary Nagel,  said  on  February  4  last,  at  a 
hearing  of  the  conservation  committee 
of  the  United  States,  on  page  10,  in  answer 
to  this  question: 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  How  many  did  you 
kill  last  year? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  We  killed  12,920. 

"Q.  WTiat  was  the  youngest  seal  you 
killed;  what  age? 

"A.  Two  years  old." 

There  we  have  the  official  statement  of 
the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
without  doubt  or  equivocation,  without 
any  question  of  law  or  anything,  given  to 
the  Senate  committee,  that  they  had 
killed  none  of  those  seals,  12,920,  under 
2  years  of  age.  Are  you  ready  to  certify 
to  that  statement  here  before  this  com- 
mittee? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  That  is  Mr.  Lembkey's 
statement. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No;  but,  my  dear  sir,  he 
is  your  agent.  I  want  you  to  certify  to  it. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  am  not  evading  any- 
thing; I  want  that  distinctly  understood. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  you  ceitify  to  that 
statement? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  do  not  have  to  certify 
to  any  statement  made  by  another  man. 
That  is  his  statement.  That  is  the  state- 
ment as  it  comes  to  the  Bureau  of  Fish- 
eries from  the  officials.  That  is  an  official 
record  as  it  comes  to  me.  (Hearings  No.  2, 
p.  117,  June  9,  1911.) 


FUK-SEAL  HERD  OF   ALASKA. 


189 


my  supervision  in  those  days.  The  regu- 
lations of  1910  do  not  make  a  restriction 
of  that  character.  (Hearing  No.  2,  p.  106, 
June  9,  1911.) 


" Scientists"  Bowers  and  Ever- 
mann  deny  the  good  results  of 
the  modus  vivendi  of  1891-1893: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Xow,  on  page  137,  rigjit 
under  this,  following  right  there,  Mr. 
McGillicuddy  asks  Mr.  Bowers  this  ques- 
tion : 

"Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  Do  you  think  it 
would  be  well  to  have  a  closed  time? 

"Mr.  BOWERS.  Not  on  land.  There 
was  a  closed  time  from  1891,  I  believe, 
until  1894.  The  modus  vivendi  was  put 
in  operation  then.  That  modus  vivendi 
did  more  to  exterminate  the  seals  than  any 
previous  order  issued  or  given  for  the  five 
years  prior  to  1890." 

Did  you  inspire  or  aid  him  in  making 
that  declaration,  Dr.  Evermann? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  No.  sir. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Haven't  you  made  a  simi- 
lar declaration? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  have  made  a  state- 
ment regarding  the  modus  vivendi. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  As  being  the  most  destruc- 
tive thing  possible,  didn't  you? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  In  the  essential  fea- 
tures of  that  statement  I  agree  fully  with 
Commissioner  Bowers,  and  as  to  the  evil 
results  of  the  modus  vivendi,  yes.  (Hear- 
ing No.  10,  pp.  633,  634,  Apr.  20,  1912.) 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey,  in  1904  the 
Hitchcock  rules  were  first  published,  I 
believe.  Have  they  been  changed  since 
then? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes;  they  have. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  As  to  killing  any  seal  un- 
der 2  years  of  age? 

Mr.  "LEMBKEY.  Not  so  far  as  to  killing 
any  seal  under  2  years  of  age,  but  in  1906 
they  were  changed  so  as  to  make  the  mini- 
mum weight  5  instead  of  5£  pounds. 
(Hearing  No.  9,  p.  449,  Apr.  13,  1912.) 

But  their  associate  Townsend, 
"sealing  expert/'  does  not  deny 
those  good  results." 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Is  Mr.  Charles. H.  Town- 
send  a  reliable  witness  as  to  the  modus 
vivendi? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Mr.  Townsend  is  a 
very  reliable  man;  yes. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Allow  me  to  read  what 
Mr.  Charles  H.  Townsend  says  of  this  mo- 
dus vivendi  in  his  report  to  United  States 
Fish  Commissioner  MacDonald,  Febru- 
ary 26,  1894: 

"It  is  undoubtedly  true,  however,  that 
the  closing  of  Bering  Sea  to  sealing  vessels 
during  the  period  of  the  modus  vivendi 
has  had  a  most  salutary  effect,  and  that 
the  rookeries  of  the  Pribilof  Islands  in 
their  present  condition  are  so  nearly  sta- 
tionary as  regards  the  number  of  seals 
since  this  regulation  came  into  effect  is 
distinctly  traceable  to  the  protection  so 
afforded." 

That  is  found  on  page  7,  Senate  Docu- 
ment 137,  Fifty-fourth  Congress,  first  ses- 
sion. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Is  this  the  honorable 
Charles  H.  Townsend? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No;  he  is  an  associate  of 
Dr.  Evermann  in  the  Fur  Seal  Bureau. 
He  is  one  of  those  scientists  brought  in  as 
an  authority  for  all  the  Bureau  o*  Fisheries 
is  doing.  Now  I  want  to  ask  Dr.  Ever- 
mann how  he  reconciles  his  sweeping  de- 
nunciation of  the  modus  vivendi  of  1891- 
1893  with  this  statement  of  Mr.  Town- 
send? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  AVhen  the  committee 
calls  Dr.  Townsend,  as  I  believe  the  com- 
mittee has  arranged  to  do,  Dr.  Townsend 
can  give  his  own  explanation  of  his  own 
reports  and  statements. 

.Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  you  do  not  have  any 
thing  to  take  back?  You  are  willing  to 
stand  by  your  denunciation? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Undoubtedly. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Townsend  was  up 
there  and  knew  what  he  was  talking 
about,  didn't  he? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  am  not  offering  any 
apology  for  Mr.  Townsend's  testimony. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  He  had  personal  knowl- 
edge, and  you  had  not,  didn't  he? 


190 


FUK-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 


Evermann  tells  the  committee 
of  his  qualification  by  experience 
and  study  on  the  seal  islands: 


Dr.  EVERMANN.  One  of  the  interesting 

phases  of  this  question  that  has  attracted 
my  attention  is  the  attitude  which  some 
persons  have  assumed  toward  the  large 
numbers  of  able  and  distinguished  natu- 
ralists who  have  visited  the  seal  islands 
and  who  are  without  question  the  m?  i 
most  familiar  with  the  fur-seal  herd  and 
the  many  problems  connected  with  its 
management  and  effective  conservation. 

Within  the  last  25  years  nearly  a  score 
of  the  most  distinguished  naturalists,  not 
only  of  this  country  but  of  Great  Britain, 
Canada,  and  Japan,  have  visited  our  seal 
islands  for  the  specific  purpose  of  study- 
ing the  habits  of  the  fur  seals  and  the 
problems  connected  with  the  proper  man- 
agement of  the  herd.  Among  these  gen- 
tlemen I  may  mention  the  following: 

Dr.  EVERMANN  (reading): 

"Dr.  Barton  Warren  Evermann,  in 
charge  of  the  Alaska  fisheries  service, 
who,  as  special  fur-seal  commissioner  in 
1892,  spent  six  months  on  our  seal  islands 
in  the  north  Pacific  and  on  the  Russian 
seal  islands,  studying  the  fur-seal  rook- 
eries, hauling  grounds,  and  migrations." 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  take  most  of  this 
information  you  get  from  records  and 
documents,  do  you  not,  Doctor? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  have  been  in  the 
islands  myself. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Or  from  actual  per- 
sonal observations? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  have  been  in  the 
seal  islands  myself  once. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  When  was  that? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  In  1892. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  long  were  you  there? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  spent  six  months  on 
a  fur-seal  investigation  in  1892. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  long  were  you  on 
the  islands? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Only  a  very  few  days. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  what  I  thought. 
(Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  518-519,  Apr.  20, 
1912.) 


-  Dr.  EVERMAKX.  He  had  knowledge  of 
conditions  on  the  islands  in  that  year 
which  I  did  not  possess,  because  I  was 
not  on  the  islands  in  that  year.  (Hearing 
No.  10,  p.  634,  Apr.  20,  1912.) 

Proof  found  of  the  " value"  of 
his  experience  and  study  while 
"six  months  on  our  seal  islands" 
("  studying"): 

JOURNAL  OF  THE  OFFICE  OF  THE  UNITED 
STATES  TREASURY  AGENT  IN  CHARGE  OF 
ST.  PAUL'S  ISLAND,  ALASKA. 

Friday,  July  22,  1892. 

Messrs.  Evermann  and  Miller  visited 
Northeast  Point.  Prof.  Evermann  re- 
ports the  finding  of  four  cow  seals  dead  at 
Northeast  Point. 

Monday,  July  25,  1892. 

The  watchman  at  Northeast  Point, 
Martin  Nedaragoff,  reports  that  the  cow 
seals  reported  dead  by  Prof.  Evermaun 
were  not  fur  seals  at  all,  but  four  sea  lion 
pups. 

Agent  Brown  and  Dr.  Voss  and  Messrs. 
Macoun  and  Maynard  will  go  to  Northeast 
Point  and  make  a  thorough  investigation 
of  the  matter. 

Messrs.  Brown  and  Chichester,  accom- 
panied by  Dr.  Voss,  went  to  Northeast 
Point  and  made  a  thorough  investigation 
of  the  dead  seal  cow  question,  and  they 
found  that  they  were  sea  lion  pups,  and 
that  Prof.  Evermann  was  mistaken,  and 
that  the  native  watchman  was  right  in 
every  particular. 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


191 


E verm ann,  Bowers,  and  Smith 
put  out  this  story  showing  their 
opposition  to  the  Hay-Elliott 
treaty: 

[Boston  Transcript,  Oct.  30,  1909.] 

THE   "SEAL  MONOPOLY" — A  COMPLETE 
EXPLANATION  OF  THE  ARRANGEMENT. 

Exclusive  rights  on  the  Pribilof  Islands 
again  to  be  granted  to  the  North  Ameri- 
can Commercial  Co. — The  monopoly  is 
only  American:  it  does  not  cover  the 
entire  business — There  is,  however, 
much  criticism,  and  many  charges  of 
abuses  are  made :  but  the  Government 
is  satisfied  with  the  system — Some  pro- 
visions of  the  contract— The  Hay- 
Elliott  plan  for  a  remedy  of  conditions. 

PROF.  ELLIOTT'S  REMEDY. 

WASHINGTON,  October  28. 
Newspaper  offices  have  been  invaded 
more  or  less  of  late  by  communications 
from  Prof.  Henry  W.  Elliott,  of  Ohio,  for- 
merly a  well-known  figure  in  Washington, 
sharply  criticizing  the  apparent  inaction 
of  the  United  States  Government  in  reach- 
ing an  international  agreement  for  the  pro- 
tection of  the  seal  industry.  Prof.  Elliott 
is  fond  of  harking  back  to  an  agreement 
which  he,  in  cooperation  with  Secretary 
of  State  John  Hay,  was  about  to  conclude 
with  Sir  Mortimer  Durand,  the  British 
ambassador,  when  the  negotiations  were 
terminated  by  the  retirement  of  Mr.  Hay, 
whose  death  followed  soon  after.  The 
Hay-Elliott  agreement,  as  it  has  been 
styled,  would  have  settled  the  whole  fur- 
seal  question,  in  the  opinion  of  Prof.  El- 
liott; but  according  to  the  view  of  Gov- 
ernment officials  who  are  supposed  to 
know  most  about  the  sealing  question,  it 
would  still  have  left  the  main  question 
not  only  unsettled,  but  in  a  worse  situa- 
tion than  before.  This  agreement,  which 
bears  date  of  March  7,  1905,  provided: 

(1)  That  all  killing  of  fur  seals  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands  and  in  the  waters  of  Be- 
ring Sea  and  the  North  Pacific  should  be 
entirely   suspended    and    prohibited    to 
American  citizens  and  British  subjects 
for  a  period  of  12  or  more  years  from  its 
date. 

(2)  That  when,  after  this  period  of  rest 
has  lapsed,  killing  may  be  resumed  on 
these  islands  only,  and  only  of  a  safe  num- 
ber of  surplus  male  seals  annually  found 
there,  no  killing  at  sea  of  any  kind  what- 
ever to  be  resumed ;  this  killing  to  be  done 
by  the  American  resident  agents  on  the 
islands,  jointly  under  the  supervision  of 
Canadian  resident  agents. 

(3)  That  for  this  complete  suspension 
of  the  rights  of  British  subjects  to  kill 


Evermann  then  attempts  to 
deny  this  record  as  published  by 
him  in  the  Boston  Transcript, 
October  30,  1909: 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  thought  it  was  a 
good  thing  to  bring  about  this  treaty,  did 
you  not? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Undoubtedly,  Mr. 
Chairman.  And  I  may  say  that  the  other 
members  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  and 
myself  contributed  everything  within 
our  power  to  bring  about  the  signing  of  the 
treaty. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  not  think  it 
would  have  been  a  good  thing  if  this  treaty 
had  been  entered  into  when  Hay  was  Sec- 
retary of  State? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  A  treaty  of  this  kind 
ought  to  have  been  negotiated  in  the 
eighties,  undoubtedly;  the  earlier  the 
better;  but  even  late  is  better  than  never 
at  all.  But  it  seemed  to  have  never  been 
handled  effectively  until  last  year. 
(Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  991,  992,  July  29, 
1912.) 

A  CURIOUS  "EXPLANATION  " 

Stung  into  some  semblance  of  activity 
by  recent  exposures  of  lamentable  condi- 
tions in  the  seal  fisheries  of  the  Bering 
Sea,  the  Department  of  Commerce  and 
Labor  at  Washington  has  at  last  been 
moved  to  offer  a  detailed  defense  of  its 
attitude  of  neglect.  The  Washington  cor- 
respondent of  the  Boston  Transcript,  in  a 
two-column  review  of  sealing  conditions 
as  they  appear  to  Secretary  Nagel's  de- 
partment, performs  a  public  service  by 
uncovering  the  official  mind  upon  this  im- 
portant question. 

The  Transcript  man,  claiming  to  ad- 
vance no  opinions  of  his  own,  gives  a  fairly 
complete  picture  of  the  governmental  atti- 
tude upon  the  seal-fisheries  question.  He 
reflects  the  department's  "reasons"  for 
opposing  a  settlement  of  the  long  contro- 
versy in  accordance  with  the  Hay-Elliott 
plan,  which  was  in  favor  both  at  Washing- 
ton and  Ottawa  when  Mr.  Hay  was  Secre- 
tary of  State,  and  is  still  favored  at  the 
Canadian  capital.  This  plan  of  agree- 
ment contemplated  a  treaty  between  the 
United  States  and  Great  Britain  (Canada) 
first  and  then  a  similarly  binding  agree- 
ment with  Russia  and  Japan,  the  nations 
next  in  interest.  The  Government's  ex- 
cuse for  not  pressing  a  settlement  upon 
this  plan,  as  it  could  have  been  done  at 
any  time  since  the  death  of  John  Hay,  is 
thus  told  through  the  Transcript  corre- 
spondent : 

' '  Even  though  Japan  and  willing  Russia 
join  with  Great  Britain  and  the  United 
States  in  an  international  agreement, 
nothing  would  exist  to  hinder  France  or 


192 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


seals  on  the  high  seas,  Canada  will  bear 
one-fourth  of  the  expense  of  maintenance 
of  the  natives  of  the  seal  islands,  annually, 
and  cost  of  care  and  conservation  of  the 
fur-seal  herd;  and  Canada  will  receive 
one-fourth  of  the  gross  proceeds  of  the  sale 
of  skins  annually  taken  on  these  islands. 

Prof.  Elliott  appends  his  opinion  that 
when  the  Alaska  fur-seal  herd  is  fully  re- 
stored, from  75,000  to  80,000  young  male 
seals  can  safely  be  taken  every  season 
without  injury  to  the  regular  birth  rate 
of  the  herd. 

However  much  impression  the  Hay- 
Elliott  agreement  may  have  made  upon 
the  authorities  at  the  time,  it  has  failed 
to  command  the  esteem  of  the  officials  of 
the  State  Department  and  the  Bureau  of 
Fisheries  since.  They  point  out  that  its 
great  inherent  weakness  is  that  appar- 
ently it  comprehends  only  Canada  and 
the  United  States  as  necessary  factors 
in  an  international  sealing  agreement, 
whereas  not  only  is  Japan  the  chief  'ag- 
gressor, but  she  and  every  other  country 
in  the  world  would  still  enjoy  the  right 
to  kill  seals  in  the  open  sea,  without  the 
competition  which  the  United  States  now 
supplies  on  the  Pribilof  Islands.  Even 
should  Japan  and  willing  Russia  join  with 
Great  Britain  and  the  United  States  in  an 
international  agreement,  nothing  would 
exist  to  hinder  France  or  any  other 
country  from  pelagic  sealing,  hence  the 
only  effect  of  such  an  agreement  might  be 
to  turn  the  fur-seal  fisheries  of  the  world 
over  to  countries  which  now  do  not  par- 
ticipate in  them.  It  is  obvious,  therefore, 
that  to  be  effective  an  international  agree- 
ment must  include  pretty  much  all  the 
civilized  nations  of  the  earth.  In  view  of 
this  apparently  self-evident  truth,  the 
Elliott  solution  of  the  problem  is  re- 
garded in  Washington  as  a  very  ineffec- 
tive affair.  The  point  can  be  made  also, 
that  the  Senate  probably  would  be  slow 
to  ratify  any  treaty  that  contemplated  the 
payment  of  a  royalty  to  a  foreign  Govern- 
ment upon  products  which  are  clearly  the 
property  of  the  United  States.  (Hearing 
No.  3,  pp.  151,  152,  July  6,  1911.) 

Evermann  introduces  the  agent 
of  the  seal  lessees  to  the  com- 
mittee as  another  person. 

NATURALISTS  WHO  HAVE  STUDIED  THE 
FUR  SEAL  FAVOR  KILLING  OF  SURPLUS 
MALES. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  One  of  the  interesting 
phases  of  this  question  that  has  attracted 
my  attention  is  the  attitude  which  some 
persons  have  assumed  toward  the  large 
numbers  of  able  and  distinguished  natu- 
ralists who  have  visited  the  seal  islands 
and  who  are  without  question  the  men 
most  familiar  with  the  fur-seal  herd  and 


any  other  country  from  pelagic  sealing; 
hence  the  only  effect  of  such  an  agree- 
ment might  be  to  turn  the  fur-seal  fisher- 
ies of  the  world  over  to  countries  which 
now  do  not  participate  in  them.  It  is 
obvious,  therefore,  that  to  be  effective  an 
international  agreement  must  include 
pretty  much  all  the  civilized  nations  of 
the  earth." 

The  explanation  is  weak  and  prepos- 
terous. Take  France,  for  instance,  as  a 
possible  pelagic  sealer.  What  ports  could 
she,  engaged  in  contraband  trade,  use  as 
bases -of  supplies?  Where  would  she  land 
her  skins?  The  nearest  French  port  is 
perhaps  10,000  miles  away  as  ships  must 
sail.  Her  furs  would  spoil,  her  sailors  and 
fishermen  starve,  her  vessels,  tossed  and 
wrecked  in  that  stormy  sea,  could  not  be 
repaired.  And  as  with  France,  so  with 
any  other  nation  outside  the  circle  of  the 
proposed  agreement. 

The  United  States,  Great  Britain,  Rus- 
sia, and  Japan  control  the  situation  by 
geographical  conditions.  There  is  every 
reason  to  believe  that  the  three  would 
join  with  the  Government  at  Washington 
to  stop  the  wanton  destruction  of  a  great 
natural  resource  if  the  State  Department 
would  but  take  the  initiative. 

Meanwhile  the  old  question  remains 
unanswered:  Why  does  the  United  States 
refuse  to  act?  This  ' '  explanation  "  of  the 
Transcript  correspondent  is  notable  for  its 
utter  failure  to  explain.  (Plain  Dealer, 
Cleveland,  Ohio,  Nov.  8,  1909.) 


The  reason  why  Jos.  Stanley- 
Brown  is  so  highly  regarded  oy 
the  Bureau  of  Fisheries. 

OFFICIAL      JOURNAL      OF     THE      AGENT     IN 
CHARGE  OF  ST.  PAULS  ISLAND,  ALASKA. 

Thursday,  June  9,  1892. 
Mr.  J.  Stanley-Brown  arrived  and  took 
the    place    of    Maj.   Williams  as  United 
States  agent  in  charge  of  the  seal  islands. 

Friday.  July  8,  1892. 
The  entire  control  and  management  of 
the  killing  grounds  and  the  killing  of  the 
seals  were  given   to  Mr.  Fowler,  of  the 


FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF   ALASKA. 


193 


the  many  problems  connected  with  its 
management  and  effective'  conservation. 

Within  the  last  25  years  nearly  a  s< ore 
of  the  most  distinguished  naturalists,  not 
only  of  this  country,  l.ut  of  Great  Britain, 
Canada,  and  Japan,  have  visited  our  seal 
islands  for  the  spe<  ilic  purpose  of  study- 
ing the  hal>its  of  the  fi.r  seals  and  the 
problems  connected  with  the  proper 
management  of  the  herd.  Among  these 
gentlemen  I  may  mention  the  following 
(reading): 

"Dr.  Barton  Warren  Kvermann,  in 
charge  of  the  Alaska  iislu-rics  service, 
who.  as  special  fur-seal  commissioner  in 
-pent  MX  months  on  our  seal  islands 
in  the  North  Pacific  and  on  the  Russian 
seal  islands,  studying  the  fr.r-seal  rook- 
eries, hauling  grounds,  and  migrations. 

"Mr.  Joseph  Stanley-Brown,  of  New 
York,  spent  the  seasons  of  'MM.  1892, 
IM»5.  l^Mi.  1897.  and  ISO!)  on  the 
seal  islands,  where,  as  natr.ralist  and 
keen  business  man.  he  made  very  thor- 
ough study  and  investigations  not  only 
of  the  habits  of  the  seals  but  very  valua- 
ble study  of  the  economic  questions 
involved." 

Evermann  attempts  to  misstate 
the  Russian  record  of  killing: 


Dr.  EVERMANN.  They  took  a  great 
number  of  these  seals  during  the  closed 
season  from  1835  to  1846? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes:  ''gray  pups."  all 
males,  in  November .  annually,  and  it 
didn't  destroy  them  either.  It' would  be 
a  good  thing  to  follow  that  to-day. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  <  >n  page  65.  line  1,  you 
say: 

'"Way  buck  as  far  as  1826  the  Russians 
themselves  recognized  the  fact  that  they 
were  culling  the  herds  too  closely — that 
they  were  ruining  the  business  by  the 
land  killing  of  all  the  choice  males;  they 
knew  that  they  alone  on  the  islands  were 
to  blame,  because  no  such  thing  as  hunt- 
ing fur  seals  in  the  water  by  white  men 
then  was  dreamed  of,  much  less  done." 

Do  you  seriously  claim  that  it  was  the 
killing  of  males  that  reduced  the  herd? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  claim  that  the  Russian 
agents  so  reported. 

Dr.  E\  EHMANN.  Do  you  claim  it  did? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Certainly  I  do. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  Do  you  not  know  that 
up  to  at  least  l^So  female  seals  were  reg- 
ularly killed  by  the  Russians? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No.  I  know  you  injected 
it  into  a  report  of  another  committee  of 
this  House,  and  the  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee apologized  for  the  misinformation 
he  got  from  you.  I'm  glad  you  asked  me 
that  question.  (Hearing  No.  10,  p.  616. 
April  24.  1912.  House  Committee  on  Ex- 

21588—13 13 


North  American  Commercial  Co.,  by 
order  of  Mr.  J.  Stanley- Brown,  and  Assist- 
ant Agent  Murray  was  ordered  to  count 
the  seals. 

Wednesday,  June  6,  1894. 
Steamer  Lakme,  of  the  North  American 
Commercial  Co.  arrived,  having  on 
board  *  *  *  Mr.  Brown,  superin- 
tendent of  the  North  American  Commer- 
cial Co. 


Elliott  submits  to  the  commit- 
tee the  facts  in  re  method  of  Rus- 
sian killing: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Way  back  as  far  as  1826 
the  Russians  themselves  recognized  the 
fact  that  they  were  culling  the  herds  top 
closely — that  they  were  ruining  the  busi- 
by  the  land  killing  of  all  the  choice  males; 
they  knew  that  they  alone '  on  the 
islands  were  to  blame,  because  no  such 
thing  as  hunting  fur  seals  in  the  water  by 
white  men  then  was  dreamed  of,  much 
less  done. 

In  December,  1820,  Gen.  Tanovsky, 
the  imperial  Russian  agent,  sent  over  to 
Sitka  from  St.  Petersburg  in  1818,  to  exam- 
ine into  the  question  of  that  decline  of  the 
fur-seal  catch,  then  wrote  to  his  Govern- 
ment that  "so  severe  is  this  practice  of" 
culling  the  best  males  for  slaughter,  "  that 
if  any  of  the  young  breeders  are  not  killed 
by  autumn,  they  were  sure  to  be  killed 
by  the  following  spring/'  and  urged  the 
reformation  of  this  work  then  on  the 
islands. 

Here  is  this  evil  of  overdriving  and  cull- 
ing the  herd  presented  and  denned  50 
years  before  I  saw  it,  and  nearly  70  years 
before  Jordan  denies  its  existence  in  1898. 
Think  of  it — we  have  sent  two  investigat- 
ing commissions  since  1890  up  to  our 
ruined  fur-seal  preserves  on  the  Pribilof 
Islands,  one  in  1891  and  the  other  in 
1896-7,  and  yet,  in  spite  of  this  plain  Rus- 
sian record  and  my  detailed  and  unan- 
swerable indictment  of  that  particular 
abuse  in  1890,  these  commissioners 


194  FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 

penditures  in  the   Department  of  Com-      blindly  and  stupidly  deny  it.     They  at- 
merceand  Labor.)  tempt  to  set  aside  the  Russian  record  by 

saying  that  the  Russians  then  killed  fc- 
males  as  well  as  males  arid  drove  them  up 
to  the  shambles  in  equal  numbers. 

The  Russians  did  nothing  of  the  sort. 
They  began  the  season  early  in  June  by 
driving  from  the  hauling  Wounds  pre- 
cisely as  we  do  to-day  and  continued  so  to 
drive  all  through  the  rest  of  the  season; 
they  never  went  upon  the  rookeries  and 
drove  off  the  females:  they  never  have 
done  so  since  1799.  How.' then,  did  the 
females  get  into  their  drives? 

The  females  fell  into  these  dri  ves  of  the 
Russians  because  thai  work  was  pro- 
tracted lh rough  the  whole  season — from 
June  1  to  December  I.  In  this  way  the 
drivers  picked  up  many  cows  'after 
August  .1  to  10,  to  the  end  of  November 
following,  since  some  of  these  animals 
during  that  period  leave  their  pla 
the  breeding  grounds  and  scatter  out  over 
large  sections  of  the  adjacent  hauling 
grounds,  so  as  to  get  mixed  in  here  and 
there  with  the  young  males.  Thus  the 
Russians  in  driving  across  the  flanks  of  the 
breeding  grounds,  going  from  the  hauling 
grounds,  during  every  August,  Septem- 
ber, October,  and  'November,  would 
sweep  up  into  their  drives  a  certain 
proportion  of  female  seals  which  are  then 
scattered  out  from  the  rookery  organiza- 
tion and  are  ranging  at  will  over  chose 
sections  of  the  hauling  grounds  driven 
from.  What  that  proportion  of  this  fe- 
male life  so  driven  was,  in  Russian  time, 
no  man  to-day  can  precisely  determine. 
From  the  best  analysis  I  can  make  of  it 
I  should  say  that '  the  Russian  female 
catch  in  their  drives  never  exceeded  30 
per  cent  of  the  total  number  driven  at  any 
time,  and  such  times  wrere  rare,  and  that 
it  ranged  as  low  as  5  per  cent  of  female  life 
up  to  the  end  of  August  annually.  (Hear- 
ing No.  2,  p.  65,  June  8,  1911,  House  Com- 
mittee on  Expenditures  in  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor.) 

IV. 

The  sworn  statements  of  Dr.  Charles  H.  Townsend,  who  is  one  of  the  experts  cited  to  the 
United  States  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation  of  National  Resources,  January  14, 
1911,  and  to  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  Department  of  Commerce  and 
Labor,  June  9,  1911,  by  Secretary  Charles  Nagel,  as  his  authority  for  killing  seals  in 
violation  of  the  law  and  regulations. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  The  advisory  board,  fur-seal  service,  consists  of  the  following: 
******* 

Dr.  Charles  H.  Townsend,  director  of  the  New  York  Aquarium,  for  many  years 
naturalist  on  the  fisheries  steamer  Albatross,  member  of  the  Fur  Seal  Commissions  of 
1896  and  1897,  and  distinguished  as  a  naturalist  and  field  investigator.  Dr.  Town- 
send  made  a  special  study  extending  over  many  years  of  our  fur  seals  and  pelagic 
sealing.  (Hearing  No.  2,  p.  109,  June  9,  1911.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


195 


THE    DEADLY    PARALLEL. 


All  killing:  of  fur  seals  on  Pribi- 
lof  Islands  is  ordered  under  rec- 
ommendation of  advisory  board, 
of  which  Townsend  is  a  member: 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  have  referred,  in  my  re- 
port of  June  30,  1909,  to  the  Alaskan  fur- 
folio  WR: 

i  the  establishment  of  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor,  in  1903,  the 
Alaskan  r.ir-s.  al  service  was  transferred 
thereto  from  the  Department  of  the  Treas- 
ury, to  which  it  had  been  attached  for 
many  years.  In  the  Department  of  Com- 
merce' and  Labor  this  service  formed  a 
distinct  branch  and  was  administered 
through  the  Secretary's  office  until  De- 
cember 28,  1908.  when  it  was  transferred 
to  the  Bmvau  of  Fisheries.  The  Commis- 
sioner of  Fisheries  has  appointed  a  special 
board,  composed  of  five  members  of  the 
bureau's  staff  who  have  personal  knowl- 
edge of  the  Alaskan  fur  seals,  and  to  this 
board  will  be  assigned  for  consideration 
and  recommendation  all  matters  pertain- 
ing to  the  seal  life  on  the  Pribilof  Islands, 
the  blue  foxes,  and  other  animal  resources 
on  the  islands,  and  the  Government's  rela- 
tions to  the  natives  and  the  lessees.  On 
January  13,  1909,  the  Secretary,  on  the 
recommendation  of  the  commissioner,  ap- 
pointed an  advisory  board  for  tb^  fur-seal 
service,  consisting  of  Dr.  David  Starr 
Jordan,  Dr.  Leonard  Stejneger,  Dr.  C. 
Hart  Merriam.  Mr.  Frederic  A.  Lucas, 
Hon.  Edwin  \Y.  Sims,  Hon.  Frank  H. 
Hitchcock,  and  Mr.  Charles  H.  Townsend. 
The  Government  is  thus  enabled  to  avail 
Itself  of  the  expert  knowledge  possessed 
by  these  naturalists  and  officials,  who, 
through  visits  to  the  seal  islands  and 
through  previous  duty  on  fur-seal  com- 
missions or  in  the  administration  of  the 
fur-seal  service,  are  familiar  with  the 
problems  involved  in  the  management  of 
the  seal  herd  and  the  seal  islands." 

Mr.  PATTOX.  These  recommendations 
were  made  to  your  bureau? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Yes. 

Mr.  PATTOX.  And  were  not  made  by 
you  at  all? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Xo,  sir. 

Mr.  PATTON.  But  were  made  by  this 
advisory  board? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Y<'8,  sir.     [Reading:] 

"It  is  recommended  that,  for  the  pres- 
ent, no  fur-seal  skin  weighing  more  than  8i 
pounds  or  less  than  5  pounds  shall  be 
taken,  and  thac  not  more  than  95  per  cent 
of  the  3-year-old  male  seals  be  killed  in 
any  one  rear."  ('Hearing  No.  2,  p.  Ill, 
June  9,  1911.) 


Townsend  swears  that  he  does 
not  know  how  the  killing  has  been 
done  on  the  islands;  does  not 
know  what  a  yearling  seal  skin  is. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  can  you  tell  us 
about  the  killing  of  seals? 

Dr.  TOWN-SEND.  I  hardly  know  what 
the  methods  are  at  the  present  time.  I 
have  not  been  there  since  1900.  I  could 
only  discuss  that  subject  now  in  a  general 
way.  if  that  would  be  satisfactory. 

The  CHAIR. MAX.  You  have  not  been 
there  since  1900? 

Dr.  TOWNS KXJ).  Not  since  1900. 

Mr.  McGiLLicuDDY.  Arc  you  familiar 
with  the  means  and  modes  ot  skinning 
seals  as  they  do  up  there  on  the  islands? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Yes. 

Mr.  McGiLi.icuDDY.  Is  there  any  way  to 
determine  the  age  of  a  seal  from  an  exami- 
nation of  the  skin  after  it  is  taken  off  the 
body? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Oh,  yes;  I  think  a  per- 
son handling  a  considerable  number  of 
then  would  be  able  to  throw  out  the  differ- 
ent ages. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  There  seem  to  have 
been  two  ways  of  determining  the  age  of  a 
seal,  one  is  by  the  measurement  of  the  skin 
and  the  other  by  the  weight.  You  are 
familiar,  I  suppose,  with  both  methods? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Only  from  hearsay.  I 
do  not  know  that  I  ever  measured  one  or 
ever  weighed  one. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  You  have  no  prac- 
tical information  on  that  subject? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  no  practical  in- 
formation on  that  subject.  I  do  not  re- 
member that  that  matter  was  ever  in  my 
instructions  at  any  time.  I  do  not  re- 
member that  I  ever  went  into  it. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  So  far  as  your  in- 
formation goes,  which  do  you  regard  as 
the  more  reliable  way  of  determining  the 
age  of  a  seal,  by  measurement  or  by  weight? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  can  not  say.  I  have 
not  gone  into  that  subject.  (Hearing  No. 
12,  pp.  736,  737,  May  24,  1912.) 


196 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


Bowers  swears  that  Townsend 
advised  him  as  a  member  of  the 
fur-seal  advisory  board. 


Mr.  PATTON.  These  recommendations 
were  made  to  your  bureau? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Yes. 

Mr.  PATTON.  And  were  not  made  by 
you  at  all? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  PATTON.  But  were  made  by  this 
advisory  board? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Yes,  sir.     [Reading:] 

"  It  is  recommended  that,  for  the  pres- 
ent, no  fur-seal  skin  weighing  more  than 
8J  pounds  or  less  than  5  pounds  shall  be 
taken,  and  that  not  more  than  95  per  cent 
of  the  3-year-old  male  seals  be  killed  in 
any  one  year."  (Hearing  No.  2,  p.  Ill, 
June  9,  1911.) 


But  Townsend  swears  he  does 
not  know  anything  of  the  job,  and 
does  not  know  what  he  said  to 
Nagel. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  do  you  know  of 
the  composition  of  the  catch  of  12,920  fur- 
seal  skins  taken  by  orders  of  Hon.  Charles 
Nagel,  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
and  Mr.  George  M.  Bowers,  United  States 
Pish  Commissioner,  during  the  season  of 
1910  on  the  Pribilof  Islands? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  am  not  posted  on  the 
composition  of  that  catch.  The  catch 
made  on  the  islands  is  supposed  to  be 
made  from  seals  that  are  over  1  year  old, 
from  the  2-year-olds  and  from  some  of  the 
small  3-year-olds.  Perhaps  I  should  say 
the  3-year-olds  with  some  of  the  smaller 
'4-year-olds  and  the  larger  2-year-olds.  I 
do  not  remember  exactly  what  they  were 
killing,  but  they  were  skins  of  sizes  which 
were  highly  marketable,  and  that  the  fur 
trade  could  use  to  the  best  advantage. 
It  does  not  make  a  great  deal  of  difference 
what  size  skins  you  take  so  long  as  you  do 
not  take  too  many  of  the  males. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  How  many  of  these 
12,920  skins  are  skins  not  taken  from  seals 
under  2  years  of  age? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  not  examined 
the  records  of  their  ages  or  the  records  of 
their  sizes,  and  can  not  answer  the  ques- 
tion without  consulting  the  records. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  you  have  a  talk 
with  Secretary  Nagel  after  he  received, 
on  May  10,  1910,  the  printed  protest  of 
the  Camp  Fire  Club  of  America  against 
the  issue  of  the  orders  to  kill  13,000  seals 
during  the  season  of  1910? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  frequently 
called  on  Secretary  Nagel  when  I  have 
been  in  Washington,  and  I  have  discussed 
seal  matters  with  him,  but  what  I  have 
said  to  him  I  can  not  say.  I  do  not  re- 
member discussing  that  point  with  him. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  did  you  discuss 
with  him? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Matters  pertaining  to 
the  seal  islands  in  general. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  Secretary  Nagel 
consult  with  you  before  sending  his  reply 
of  May  15,  1910,  to  this  protest  of  the 
Camp  Fire  Club? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  remember.  I 
do  not  remember  that  I  ever  talked  over 
the  matter  with  Mr.  Nagel  until  after  the 
Camp  Fire  Club  had  been  agitating  the 
matter  for  some  time. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Well,  you  did  discuss 
it  with  him,  didn't  you? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  discussed  fur 
seals  with  him.  (Hearing  No.  13,  p.  801. 
June  8.  19]2.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD  OF   ALASKA. 


197 


Townsend  swears  that  he  never 
'lieved  in  renewing  the  seal  le;iM>. 


Tin-  CHAIRMAN.  Dr.  Townsend,  you 
were  asked  at  a  former  hearing  whether 
you  wrote  a  letter  advising  the  releasing 
of  the  islands  for  another  term  of  years. 

Dr.  TOWNSKND.  1  believe  there  was 
such  a  question. 

The  CHAIKMAX.  And  there  was  such  a 
lrtt<-r  produced  in  the  hearing,  or  a  copy 
of  a  letter  for  the  hearing.  That  letter 
was  dated.  I  think.  January,  1910,  was  it 
not? 

Dr.  TOWXSEXD.  I  have  forgotten  the 
letter.  1  have  not  seen  it  since  then. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  letter  is  dated 
Janaury  31.  1010. 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.   Yes,  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  On  November  17. 
1909,  the  advisory  board  had  a  meeting  in 
which  you  participated  and  pursuant  to 
which  you  made  some  recommendations 
to  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor. 
Do  you  remember  that  there  was  such  a 
meeting? 

Dr.  TOWNS  KM).  1  was  at  such  a  meet- 
ing; yes,  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  the  printed  docu- 
ments here  show  that  it  was  on  November 
23.  1909.  Was  there  any  discussion  of  the 
releasing  of  the  islands  at  this  meeting  of 
the  advisory  board? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  no  distinct  rec- 
ollection of  just  what  we  did  at  these  meet- 
ings. I  do  not  remember  that  that  point 
was  dismissed  with  any  fullness,  at  least. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  If  you  were  of  the 
opinion  that  the  islands  should  not  be  re- 
i.  why  did  you  not  make  such  a 
recommendation  to  the  Secretary,  to- 
gether with  the  other  members  of  the 
board? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  was  never  of  the 
opinion  that  the  islands  should  be  re- 
leased. I  simply  supposed  that  it  would 
be  impossible  for  the  Government  to  take 
them  over,  and  that  they  would  be  re- 
leased no  matter  what  anybody  could  say. 
because  they  had  always  been  leased. 
While  I  lived  on  the  islands,  there  was 
always  more  or  less  friction  between  the 
»  and  the  Government's  authorities, 
and  I  always  felt  that  the  Government 
had  as  well  have  the  profits  of  the  seal 
islands  rather  than  divide  them  with  the 
lessees.  <  Hearing  No.  13,  p.  797.  June  8, 
1912. 


But  Townsend  "as  a  member 
of  the  advisory  board"  urges  a 
renewal  of  the  seal  lease. 

The  ''advisory  board"  gets  busy — must 
renew  the  Elkins  lease. 

NKW  YORK  AQUARIUM, 
Battery  Park,  New  York,  January  31,1910. 
Hon.  GEORGE  M.  BOWERS, 

Commissioner  United  States  Bureau  of 
Fisheries,  Washington,  D.  C. 

DEAR  SIR:  'As  a  member  of  the  fur-seal 
advisory  board  of  your  department  and 
one  always  interested  in  matters  pertain- 
ing to  the  fur-seal  industry,  I  wish  to  call 
your  attention  to  an  important  letter  re- 
ceived from  Mr.  Alfred  Eraser,  which  is 
inclosed  herewith. 

I  have  known  Mr.  Fraser  for  many  years 
and  have  every  confidence  in  his  knowl- 
edge of  this  subject,  as  well  as  his  entire 
sincerity.  During  the  many  years  that 
the  subject  of  the  fur-seal  fishery  has  been 
before  our  Government  authorities  he  has 
supplied  freely  important  statistics  cf  the 
fur-seal  trade.  He  has  been  the  principal 
American  buyer  of  sealskins  in  this  coun- 
try, and  has  been  in  the  business  for  a 
lifetime. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  a  reduction 
in  the  number  of  sealskins  now  coming 
from  the  Pribilofs  would  be  of  most  inju- 
rious to  the  sealskin  trade. 

It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  Pribilof  Is- 
lands will  be  released  this  year,  and  that 
a  small  supply  of  skins  will'be  kept  avail- 
able to  the  fur  trade.  The  reasons  for  this 
are  strongly  set  forth  in  Mr.  Eraser's  letter. 

It  is  also  important  that  the  Treasury 
Department  be  requested  to  reconsider 
the  matter  of  duty  on  sealskins. 

The  margin  of  profit  left  to  the  trade 
after  the  payment  of  duties  on  skins  whose 
value  is  already  enhanced  by  the  Gov- 
ernment tax  on  the  Pribilof  catch,  makes 
them  enormously  expensive.  In  fact, 
their  cost  is  almost  prohibitive. 

I  feel  that  with  fur-seal  service  trans- 
ferred to  your  bureau  and  the  presence  in 
your  office  of  a  number  of  men  well  in- 
formed on  this  subject,  you  are  in  a  posi- 
tion to  make  a  good  presentation  of  Mr. 
Eraser's  letter  to  the  proper  authorities, 
and  I  earnestly  hope  that  you  will  under- 
take to  have  this  important  matter  prop- 
erly presented. 

I  would  suggest  also  that  a  copy  of  this 
letter  be  sent  to  Senator  Dixon,  who  has 
introduced  a  resolution  calling  for  a  cessa- 
tion of  seal  killing  on  the  Pribilofs,  which 
would  undoubtedly  result  in  more  harm 
than  good  at  the  present  time. 

Very  respert fully,  yours, 

C.  H.  TOWNSEND. 

(Hearing  No.  3,  Julv  6.  1911,  pp.  159, 
160.) 


198 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Townsend  does  not  remember 
that  he  did  anything  to  try  and 
defeat  the  re-leasing  bill. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you,  at  the  time 
Mr.  Bowers  asked  you  .to  take  up  with 
the  Campfire  Club  of  America  the  sub- 
ject of  renewing  the  fur-seal  lease — 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  What  is  the  question? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you,  at  the  time 
Mr.  Bowers  asked  you  to  take  up  with 
the  Campfire  Club 'of  America  the  sub- 
ject of  renewing  the  fur-seal  lease,  in 
which  Ogden  Mills  is  interested,  have 
any— 

Dr.  TOWNSEND  (interposing).  I  have 
no  recollection  of  Mr.  Bowers  asking  me 
to  take  up  the  matter  of  the  Campfire 
Club. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  do  not?  Let  me 
see  if  you  do  not.  On  page  157,  of  hear- 
ing No.  3,  is  a  letter  dated  "Department 
of  Commeice  and  Labor,  Bureau  of 
Fisheries,  Washington,  D.  (.'.,  December 
16,  1909,"  signed  by  ''Barton  W.  Ever- 
mann"  (p.  157) — Have  you  got  it? 

DEPARTMENT  OF  COM.  AND  LABOR, 

BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 
Washington,  December  16.  1909. 
The  COMMISSIONER: 

The  Washington  Star  of  December  10 
last  announced  that  the  Campfire  Club, 
of  New  York,  had  inaugurated  a  campaign 
to  save  the  fur-seal  herd  through  legisla- 
tion designed  to  prevent  the  re-leasing 
of  the  sealing  right,  the  cessation  of  all 
killing  on  the  islands  for  10  years  except 
for  natives'  food,  and  to  secure  the  open- 
ing of  negotiations  with  Great  Britain 
to  revise  the  regulations  of  the  Paris 
tribunal.  As  the  result  of  this  move- 
ment, on  December  7  three  resolutions 
were  introduced  by  Senator  Dixon,  of 
Montana,  one  of  which  embodies  the  pro- 
visions before  mentioned,  the  other  two 
calling  for  the  publication  of  fur-seal 
correspondence  and  reports  since  1904. 

As  the  object  of  this  movement  is  at 
variance  with  the  program  of  this  bureau 
and  of  the  recommendations  of  the 
advisory  fur-seal  board,  notably  in  the 
plan  to  prevent  killing  and  the  renewal 
of  the  seal  island  lease,  the  advisability 
is  suggested  of  having  Messrs.  Townsend, 
Lucas,  and  Stanley  Brown  use  their 
influence  with  such  members  of  the 
Campfire  Club  as  they  may  be  acquainted 
with  with  the  object  of  correctly  inform- 
ing the  club  as  to  the  exact  present  status 
of  the  seal  question  and  of  securing  its 
cooperation  to  effect  the  adoption  of  the 
measures  advocated  by  this  bureau.1 

The  attached  letter  is  prepared,  hav- 
ing in  view  the  object  stated. 

BARTON  W.  EVERMANN. 


But  Lucas  remembers — Town- 
send  started  him. 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes.  \<>\v.  I  would  like 
to  ask  you,  Dr.  Lucas,  with  this  letter 
before  you,  who  called  on  you.  and  asked 
you  to  go  to  work  and  stop  this  legisla- 
tion in  Congress? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  At  the  immediate  moment 
I  do  not  recall  that  anyone  called  upon 
me  and  asked  me  to  stop  this  legislation 
in  Congress. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  This  resolution  of  Senator 
Dixon's  presented  December  7,  1909; 
you  don't  remember  anyone  at  all  calling 
on  you  in  regard  to  that? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  If  anyone  it  was  Dr.  Town- 
send. 

Mi.  ELLIOTT.  Did  he  cite  any  authority 
for  calling  on  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  He  did  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Just  his  own  individual 
idea? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  To  the  best  of  my  knowl- 
edge he  said  this  resolution  was  up— I 
wish  this  to  be  taken  down  as  mere  hear- 
>ay.  Mr.  Chairman;  he  called  me  up  over 
the  phone  and  said  this  resolution  was 
up,  and  asked  me  to  write  a  protest 
against  it,  which  I  did. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  A  protest  against  the 
enactment  of  the  law? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Against  the  enactment  of 
the  proposed  law  making  a  closed  season. 
(Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  7:M.  725,  May  Hi 
1912.) 


FUB-SEAL  HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


199 


Dr.  TOWNS F.M).    Y 

Mi.  ELLIOTT.  Is  lhai  letter  under  your 
-  *  I  do  not  need  \a  read  it? 

I>r.  TOWXSF.M).  Yes:  I  have  read  this 
letter  here.  sir.  What  do  you  wish  to 
ask  me  in  connection  with  it? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Who  called  on  you.  who 
used  their  influence  with  you.  before 
you  went  to  Mr.  Lucas,  and  asked  him  to 
write  letters  to  Members  of  Congress 
opposing  the  Dixon  resolution,  which 
prevented  the  renewal  of  the  lease? 
Who  asked  yon  to  go  to  Mr.  Lucas'.' 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  remember 
that  anybody  asked  me  to  go  to  Mr. 
Liu  a<.  i  Heariny  No.  lL>.  pp.  775.  770. 
May  Hi.  J912.) 

Townsend  is  engaged  in  the 
business  of  ''preventing  well- 
meaning  Congressmen  from  being 
deceived/'  etc. 

[Science,  Mar.  1,  1912.] 

To  THE  EDITOR  OF  SCIENCE:  In  Science 
for  Eebruary  2  Mr.  Marshall  McLean, 
member  of  the  Camp  Fire  Club,  enters 
the  list  of  those  who  would  by  indirection 
ruin  the  fur-seal  herd.  He  would  have 
''natural  conditions''  rule  upon  the  fur- 
seal  islands  and  ''all  killing  of  selected 
males  for  commercial  purposes  '' 
cease  until  the  tide  of  increase  in  the  fur- 
seal  herd  has  once  more  set  toward  the 
flood."  He  lays  down  as  reason  for  this 
the  principle  "that  when  any  species  of 
wild  animal  has  become  so  depleted  as  to 
be  in  danger  of  extinction,  the  best  rem- 
edy is  to  let  it  absolutely  alone." 

"This  is  not  the  first  time  I  have  en- 
deavored to  prevent  well-meaning  Con- 
gressmen from  being  deceived  by  the  mis- 
representations which  have  been  poured 
upon  them  for  many  years.  The  mischief- 
maker  referred  to 'has  bobbed  up  every 
other  year  for  the  past  18  yea"rs  and  has 
been  discredited  every  time.  I  hope  you 
will  look  up  his  record  as  just  published 
in  House  Document  No.  93,  Sixty-second 
Congress,  first  session,  pages  1153-1162." 

The  Member  of  the  House  to  whom  I 
sent  this  letter  has  at  last  presented  an 
amendment  to  the  State  Department  bill 
in  which  he  proposes  to  limit  the  killing 
of  male  seals  to  5,000  a  year  for  five  years, 
7,500  a  year  for  the  following  five  years, 
and  10,000  annually  for  five  years  after 
that.  At  the  end  of  15  years  new  regu- 
lations to  be  adopted. 

Now  that  is  better.  The  gentleman  has 
evidently  been  thinking  it  over.  We 
shouldn't  probably  kill  much  closer  if 
allowed  to  have  our  own  way.  Perhaps 
by  the  time  the  treaty  bill  reaches  me 
Senate  Congress  will  decide  that  the 
Bureau  of  Fisheries  is  able  to  handle  the 
seal  fishery  safely  for  the  seal  herd  and 
for  the  Government. 


The  well-meaning  Congressmen 
take  notice  of  Townsend's  efforts: 
they  are  not  deceived. 


In  1893  proceedings  were  commenced 
in  the  State  Department,  claiming  dam- 
ages on  the  part  of  owners,  master,  and 
crew  of  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis. 
H.  H.  D.  Peirceand  Charles  H.  Townsend, 
"sealing  experts,"  of  the  United  States 
Bureau  of  Fisheries,  prepared  the  cases 
for  the  parties  interested  and  presented 
the  claim  on  the  part  of  the  United  States 
against  the  Russian  Government  at  The 
Hague  in  1902,  which  resulted  in  an  award 
of  approximately  $50,000  in  favor  of  the 
United  States  Government  for  the  use  of 
the  parties  interested,  including  Alexan- 
der McLean  and  Max  Weieman,  Novem- 
ber 29,  1902.  The  said  H.  H.  D.  Peirce 
and  Charles  H.  Townsend  presented  the 
claim  of  Max  Weisman  as  the  owner  of  the 
vessel  James  Hamilton  Lewis  before  the 
tribunal  at  The  Hague,  when  in  truth  and 
in  fact  the  owner  of  said  schooner  at  the  time 
of  its  seizure  was  Herman  Liebes,  of  San 
Francisco.  The  said  H.  H.  D.  Peirce  and 
Charles  H.  Townsend  represented  to  the  tri- 
bunal in  the  trial  of  said  case  thatAlexander 
McLean,  the  captain  of  said  vessel,  was  an 
American  citizen,  when  in  truth  and  fact  he 
was  a  British  subject  and  notoriously 
known  as  a  pirate.  (See  pp.  754,  755, 
Hearing  No.  12.) 

The  committee  therefore  recommends; 

(1)  That  the  Attorney  General  be  re- 
quested to  take  such  steps  as  may  be 
necessary  to  collect  the  bond  of  $500,000 
from  the  said  North  American  Commer- 
cial Co.  and  the  sureties  thereon. 

(2)  That  the  Attorney  General  be  re- 
quested   to    institute    civil    proceedings 
against.  Isaac  Liebes  personally  to  recover 
such  damages  as  he  and  his  confederates 
did  to  the  seal  herd  of  Alaska  from  1890 
to  1910. 

(3)  That  the  Staff  Department  take  up 
a  ith   Russia   tin    matter  of  the  cast1  of  the 


200 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


As  to  the  criticism  of  my  general  si a la- 
ment about  the  Uncinaria  parasite,  1  can 
only  reply  that  our  diminished  rookerievS 
are  not  at  present  overspreading  into  the 
parasite-infected  sand  areas.  In  fad. 
Mr.  Heath  states,  as  quoted  by  Mr. 
McLean,  ''these  areas  have  been  aban- 
doned." They  must  of  course  be  fenced 
to  protect  the  younger  seals  from  infec- 
tion as  soon  -as  the  breeding  grounds 
begin  to  expand.  As  to  shooting  some  of 
the  big  males  when  they  get  too  numer- 
ous, it  would  puzzle  the  experts,  as  well 
as  Mr.  McLean,  to  say  which  were  the 
fittest  to  survive.  They  all  look  alike. 
Old  ocean  attends  to  the  matter  of  selec- 
tion in  the  case  of  the  fur  seal,  weaklings 
do  not  survive  the  seven  months1  migra- 
tion swim  among  the  killer  whales  of  the 
Pacific.  If  Mr.  McLean  will  bring  his 
committee  to  my  office  where  there  is  a 
fairly  complete  set  of  rookery  photo- 
graphs and  charts,  he  will  get  a  clearer 
understanding  of  the  Pribilof  breeding 
grounds  than  he  has  at  present .  The  fact 
is  that  the  innocent  Camp  Fire  Club  is 
"being  used  by  the  unscrupulous  lobby 
which  has  always  been  kept  at  work  by 
the  pelagic  sealers.  One  excuse  suits  ii 
as  well  as  another;  this  time  it  is  the  kill- 
ing of  surplus  males.  It  is  a  pily  that 
year  after  year  it  should  succeed  in  getting 
the  support  of  men  of  good  standing  who 
happen  to  be  ignorant  of  the  real  fads 
involved . 

('.  II .  TOWSEND. 
Member  Adrixonj  Hoard  Fur  Seal  Serrici . 

(Healing  Xo.  10.  pp.  597.  5»S.  Apr.  20. 
1912.) 

Townsend,  in  1895,  declared 
that  the  land  killing  was  injuri- 
ous. 

In  the  investigation  made  by  said  com- 
mission the  methods  of  land  killing  as  well 
as  pelagic  sealing  should  be  studied .  1 1 
may  be  remembered  that  Mr.  Henry  \V. 
Elliott,  formerly  United  States  special 
agent,  in  his  report  of  1890,  claimed  that 
the  methods  of  driving  and  killing  the 
seals  on  the  land  were  injurious  to  the 
herd.  In  this  conclusion  he  is  corrobo- 
rated by  Mr.  Townsend.  of  the  Fish  Com- 
mission, whose  report  is  also  annexed. 
(Report  of  Chas.  S.  Hamlin,  Asst.  Secy. 
Treasury,  Mar.  1,  1895,  p.  452:  "Seal  and 
Salmon  Fisheries."  Vol.  I,  1898.) 


Hamilton  L(  irix"  for  tin-  />ti  , 
of  reef (fijiny  (In  "'rony  done  by  said  L 
C.  H.  Townsend,  and  H.  H.  I).  Fein-.-. 
against  flu  Government  of  Russia,  (ifrn-ndli/ 
power. 

(4)  That  with  a  view  to  carrying  this 
recommendation  into  effect  the  Clerk  of 
the  House  be  directed  to  forward  lo  the 
Secretary  of  State  a  certified  copy  of  this 
report,  together  with  a  complete  set  of 
the  official  hearings  before  this  com- 
mittee on  this  subject. 

JOHN    II.  KOTHERMEL. 

JAS.   T.   McDERMOTT. 

JAMKS   YOKM;. 

D.  .1.   McGlLLICUDDY. 

(H.  Kept.   Xo.   1425,  Jan.  31.  1913.  (iiM 

CoilU..  :'.<!  sess..  ])]».  4.  5.) 


But  he  fell  down  in  the  shadow 
of  Jordan  and  found  that  the 
lessees  do  no  harm. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Have  you  made  any 
investigations  recently  as  to  what  the 
Government  is  doing,  and  as  to  whether, 
in  your  judgment,  the  killing  is  being 
carried  on  just  as  it  should  be  done,  result- 
ing in  a  reduction  of  the  number  of  the 
surplus  males? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  am  of  the  opinion 
that  the  matter  is  being  very  carefully 
handled  by  men  who  understand  it;  that 
they  are  harvesting  such  of  the  crop  as 
should  be  harvested,  and  that  they  are 
saving  a  sufficient  number  of  breeding 
males'  Now  that  the  convention  with 
Russia,  Japan,  and  Great  Britain  looking 
to  the  cessation  of  pelagic  sealing  has  been 
held,  I  think  that  the  treaty  should  be 
ratified  and  pelagic  sealing  put  an  end  to. 
I  do  not  think  that  the  males  should  be 
killed  too  closely,  and  I  am  not  of  the 
opinion  that  they  have  been  killed  too 
closely.  (Hearing  No.  13,  p.  810;  June 
8,  1912;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  and  L.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


201 


Townseiid  <wear-;  that  he  pro- 
duced documents  at  The  Habile 
which  refuted  charges  of  piracy 
In  re  the  James  Hamilton  Lewis 
claim. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  you  know  at  the 
time  that  they  were  the  owners  of  these 
La  in  which  this  pirate  turned  up? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  No;  I  never  knew 
anything  about  that  until  those  things 
were  brought  out  at  The  Hague. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  was  developed  at 
The  Hague  that  the  Liebes  were  the 
owners  of  this  vessel? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  That  is  my  recollec- 
tion. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  I  suppose  that  is 
in  the  public  records? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Everything,  sir,  that 
is  connected  with  the  matter  must  be 
between  the  covers  of  that  book  and  be 
between  the  covers  of  some  other  public 
document  in  which  the  matter  was 
brought  up  a  year  or  so  later  on,  perhaps 
by  Mr.  Elliott.  But  it  is  all  published. 
'Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  this  was  brought 
out  at  The  Hague,  what  did  you  advise 
Mr.  Pierce  to  do,  as  hif  "expert  pelagic 
sealing  adviser"? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  know  that  Mr. 
Pierce  ever  asked  me  for  advice  over 
there.  He  instructed  me  to  produce 
certain  documents  that  would  help  him 
refute  claims,  etc.  I  was  a  statistician. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  produce  any 
documents  that  refuted  Liebes's  claim? 

Dr.  TOWN.SEN-D.  I  have  no  recollection 
in  regard  to  it.  Whatever  was  done  is  in 
the  book . 

Mr.  Mctiiu -i< -i :i'MY.  Why  did  you 
ignore  the  abundant  sworn  testimony  on 
tile  in  the  Department  of  State  since  1893 
that  the  .fnmr*  I  fn  mil  ton  Lewis  was  a  seal- 
ing "pirate."  or  raider,  of  seal  rookeries 
on  the  Commander  Islands  in  1890  and 
1891? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  1  had  no  information 
about  the  owneiship  of  vessels  that  were 
said  to  b"  raiding  rookeries  until  the  time 
that  I  was  s»iit  to  The  Hague. 

Mr.  McdiLLict'DDY.  Well,  did  you 
know  that  there  was  s\voni  testimony  on 
file  in  the  Department  of  State  in  1893 
that  the  ./,//m.s  f/timiltnn  Lcwins  \vas  a  seal- 
ing ''pirate."  or  raider,  of  seal  rookeries 
on  the  Commander  Islands  in  1890  and 
1891? 

Dr.  TOWN  SEN  ii.  No:  I  only  knew  from 
hearing  it  discussed,  or  knowing  about  the 
raids  as  1  saw  it  discussed  in  the  news- 
papers. 

Mr.  Mr -<iiLi.ii  UDDY.  If  your  attention 
lied  to  it  in  that  wav"  did  you  make 


But  the  facts  of  sworn  record 
prove  that  the  Lewis  claim  (her 
owner  and  master's  wa-  a  fraudu- 
lent one,  and  known  widely  as 
such. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT. 

THE  PROGRESSION  OF  CAPT.  ALEXANDER 
H'LEAN  AS  AN  "AMERICAN  CITIZEN." 

1890.  In  command  of  the  J.  Hamilton 
Lewis;   H.  Liebes,  owner;    ra'ds  Copper 
Island  and  gets  off.  August  1,  with  two 
men  badly  hurt. 

1891.  In  command  of  the  /.  Hamilton 
Lewis;    seized  August  2,   while  raiding 
Copper  Island  with  the  crew  of  the  E.  E. 
Webster,  owned  by  H.  Liebes  and  com- 
manded by  his  brother ;  vessel  confiscated 
and  he  is  imprisoned  at  Vladivostock  a 
few  weeks. 

1892.  In  command  of  the  Rosa  Sparks, 
sealing  schooner,  of   San  Francisco;  no 
raids  this  year. 

1893.  In  command  of  the  steam  sealer 
Alexander,  flying  the  Hawaiian  flag;  he  is 
caught  by  the  U.  S.  S.  Mohican  raiding 
Northeast  Point,  St.  Paul  Island,  in  July, 
but  escapes  in  the  fog  because  the  war 
vessel's  engines  were  disabled. 

1894  to  1902.  In  command  of  various 
pelagic  vessels,  but  under  restraint  from 
the  lessees,  since  the  claim  of  the  J.  Ham- 
ilton Lewis  is  being  prepared  and  pressed, 
up  to  its  successful  end  November  29, 
1902,  at  The  Hague. 

1896.  He  appears  as  i)  "true  American  '' 
before  the  claims  award  commission, 
which  site  at  Victoria,  in  settlement  of 
damage  suits  against  the  United  St  .,!••- 
Government  for  seized  sealers  and  ve.<-«-ls 
in  1866-1889;  he  testifies,  "at  the  peril  of 
his  life,"  for  the  American  commissioners 
as  to  the  value  of  the  British  boats  seized. 
(See  Kept.  21 2S.  Senate  bill  3410,  58th 
Cong..  2d  sessJ  He  is  in  truth  working 
for  the  highest  figures  obtainable  from  the 
L'nited  State?  Treasury,  instead  of  the 

1903.  He  can  not  be  placed  with  cer- 
tainty this  year. 

1904.  HeVaids  Copper  Island  August  2. 
in    the  "Mexican"    schooner    ' 

one  of  his  men  seriously  shot. 

1905.  He  attempts  a  raid  on  St.  Paul 
Island.  Northeast  Point,  but  is  driven  off; 
he  is  sailing  in  the  Arajmlco,  and  defies 
arrest  by  the  United  States  agents,  for  he 
is  a  British  subject:  at  Victoria.   British 
Columbia,  in  October.  1905. 

1906.  lie   raids   St.    Paul    Island   July 
K>-17.  with  a  Japanese  outfit:  five  Japs, 
killed,  and  12  prison- -rs  taken:  there  is  a 
fleet  engaged  in  this  raid,  which  attacked 


202 


FUK-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


any  effort  to  ascertain  Avhat  the  evidence 
was  that  was  on  file  in  the  department? 

Dr.  TOWXSEXD.  Xo.  (Hearing  No.  12, 
p.  774,  May  25,  1912;  Hearing  No.  l:'>,  p. 
818,  June  8,  1912). 

Townsend  swears  that  it  was  no 
concern  of  his  when  ho  learned 
that  the  Lewis's  claim  was  fraud- 
ulent— he  was  a  "youngster"  at 
the  time  he  vouched  for  it. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Don't  ^you  know  that 
the  Liebes  received  that  money? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  know  that  damages 
were  awarded  in  favor  of  the  United  States 
for  these  vessels,  but  how  much  was  al- 
lowed to  the  owners  of  this  vessel  I  do  not 
know. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Don't  you  know  that 
the  Liebes  received  it? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  know.  T  sup- 
pose they  did.  I  presume  they  did.  The 
case  was  decided  in  favor  of  the  United 
States,  and  I  have  no  doubt  they  were 
paid;  but  from  personal  knowledge  of  it, 
I  can  not  say. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  swear  that  they 
did  not  receive  it? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  No,  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Will  you  swear  that 
they  did  not  own  the  vessel? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  No,  sir;  I  certainly 
could  not  do  that. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Don't  you  know  that 
they  did  own  it? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  think  they  owned  it; 
yes,  sir;  and  they  probably  were  paid.  I 
am  simply  avoiding  the  making  of  a  state- 
ment about  a  thing  of  which  I  am  not  ab- 
solutely positive. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  whether 
it  was  important  that  the  Government  offi- 
cials or  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
should  have  found  out  that  the  Liebes 
were  the  owneis  of  this  vessel  in  order  that 
they  could  take  propei  action,  so  far  as  the 
lease  was  concerned,  or  upon  the  bond  that 
was  given  by  the  company  to  the  Govern- 
ment? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  No,  sir;  I  was  a  good 
deal  of  a  youngster,  and  I  did  not  meddle 
with  those  matters  of  the  Government 
that  did  not  concern  me  at  all.  (Hearing 
No.  13,  p.  805.  June  8,  1912.) 


five  rookeries  at  once  and  on  the  same 
days;  they  got  away  from  all  of  them, 
except  Northeast  Point,  with  seals  and 
no  casualties.  (Hearing  Xo.  4,  p.  184, 
July  11,  1911.) 

But  Townsend  was  43  years 
old — an  old  "  youngster"  to  plead 
the  baby  act  He  was  born  in 
1859.  He  vouched  for  this  job  in 
1902. 

TOWNSEND.  ('harles  Haskins:  Zoologist, 
b.  Parnassus,  Pa.,  September  29,  1859. 
*  *  *  fisheries  expert  Russo-American 
Arbitration  at  The  Hague,  ]  902  *  *  *. 
Address,  Aquarium,  New  York.  (Who's 
Who  in  America,  1912-13,  p.  2113.) 

(NOTE. — This  is  Townsend's  own  de- 
scription of  his  age  and  standing  when  he 
vouched  for  the  pirate  McLean  and  lessee 
Liebes's  claim  as  being  "just  and  valid" 
at  The  Hague.  June-July,  1902.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF    ALASKA. 


203 


The  bogus  luir  of  the  pirate  ship 
sent  to  the  State  Department  by 
-  December  8,  1899. 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  claim  dragged,  be- 
cause the  log  book  of  the  Leu-is  was  in  the 
hands  of  its  captors.  It  was  necessary 
that  a  log  book  be  produced  which  would 
show  that  at  the  time  of  the  seizure  the 
Leu: is  was  on  the  high  seas .  The  log  book 
taken  by  the  Russians  does  not  show 
where  the  vessel  was  at  the  time  or  what 
she  had  been  doing.  This  difficulty  is 
met  by  Liebes,  who,  through  an  agent, 
George  R.  Tingle,  the  general  manager  of 
the  lessees  of  the  seal  islands,  who,  on 
December  8,  sends,  with  a  letter,  the 
"original  log"  of  the  /.  Hamilton  LevAs. 
McLean  swears  to  it  and  Tingle  vouches 
for  it  to  Secretary  of  State  Olney.  Tingle 
says  that  this  long  delay  (six  years)  in 
producing  the  log  was  due  to  his  absence 
from  the  city,  when*  in  truth,  he  was  in 
Washington  nine  months  of  each  year  ever 
eince  1899  up  to  the  date  of  the  letter. 
But  this  log,  which  owners  and  masters 
have  offered  as  the  original  log  of  the 
/.  Hamilton  Lewis,  is  soberly  and  sol- 
emnly received  at  the  State  Department 
as  a  bona  fide  exhibit  for  presentation  at 
The  Hague.  (Hearing:  No.  4,  p.  181, 
Julv  11,  1911.) 


Townsend  don't  know  Liebes — 
he  does  not  know  much  about 
San  Francisco  pelagic-sealing 
facts — he  got  the  great  bulk  of 
that  data  in  Victoria,  British  Co- 
lumbia. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Dr.  Townsend,  when  did 
you  first  meet  Isaac  and  Herman  Liebes? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  no  recollection 
of  ever  meeting  either  of  them. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  do  not  know  them? 

Dr.  TOWXSEND.  I  am  pretty  sure  that 
1  have  never  met  either  of  them. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  never  seen 
them? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  never  seen 
them. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  never  have  conferred 
with  them? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  no  recollection 
of  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  ever  been  in 
their  place  of  business? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  They  used  to  have  a 
big  store  in  San  Francisco:  it  is  possible 
I  may  have  been  in  it.  I  have  no  recol- 


Townsend,  us  an  "expert," 
vouches  for  this  pirate's  log  being 
genuine  and  legally  in  form,  at 
The  Hague  July,  1902. 

Mr.  McGiLLicuDDY.  Do  you  mean  to 
say  that  our  Government  claimed  dam- 
ages for  the  seizure  of  a  vessel  by  the 
Russian  Government  when  such  vessel 
was  engaged  in  pelagic  sealing? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  And  that  was  done 
through  our  State  Department? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  That  is  about  my  rec- 
ollection. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  You  were  there  as 
an  expert,  were  you  not? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Yes,  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  do  not  want  him  to 
make  a  statement  that  he  can  not  sub- 
stantiate, but  I  would  like  to  know  now, 
Dr.  Townsend,  in  what  capacity  you 
were  at  The  Hague  Tribunal  in  this 
matter? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  In  the  progress  of  the 
work  before  The  Hague  Tribunal  it  be- 
came necessary  for  the  Secretary  to  pro- 
duce information  on  various  sealing 
matters,  such  as  the  movements  of  sealing 
vessels.  I  carried  along  with  me  a  trunk 
full  of  log  books  of  sealing  vessels.  We 
would  have  before  us  the  charges  made 
by  the  Russian  representative  during  the 
day,  and  we  would  work  all  night  pre- 

rring  something  to  refute  the  charges, 
carried  the  log  books  that  had  been 
taken  from  the  vessels.     (Hearing  No.  12, 
pp.  756,  758,  May  24,  1912.) 

But  when  Victoria  is  reached, 
Townsend  has  no  data  whatever 
as  to  pelagic-sealing  business  duly 
claimed  by  him  May  25,  last. 


The  CHAIRMAN.  Who  compose  the  Vic- 
toria Sealers'  Association? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  know  who  the 
officers  are. 

The  CHAIRMAN  .  What  is  their  business? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  suppose  it  is  a  com- 
pany for  the  carrying  on  of  pelagic  sealing. 
They  are  the  owners  of  vessels,  and  must 
be  located  in  Victoria. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  that  their  place  of 
business? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Very  likely.  I  can 
hardly  imagine  that  it  would  be  anywhere 
else. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  How  long  have  they 
been  in  business  there? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  know,  but 
probably  for  a  good  many  years. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  a  man 
bv  the  name  of  Morris  Moss? 


204 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


lection  of  ever  going  there  to  see  those 
men. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  were  engaged  as  an 
employee  of  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries, 
looking  into  this  matter  of  pelagic  sealing 
for  a  number  of  years,  were  you  not? 
And,  in  your  reports,  you  had  occasion 
to  see  the  "owners"  and  look  into  "the 
hooks  of  the  owners"  of  pelagic-sealing 
vessels,  did  you  not? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  got  most  of  my  log 
books  directly  from  captains  of  vessels. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Do  you  not  know  from 
your  investigation  that  Liebes  was  the 
largest  dealer  in  pelagic  sealskins  on  the 
Pacific  coast? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  The  great  bulk  of  my 
data  was  obtained,  not  in  San  Francisco. 
but  in  Victoria. 

(Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  773,  774,  May  25. 
1012.) 


Townsend  repeats  the  falsehood 
of  Jordan  in  re  a  fictitious  pelagic- 
sealer's  lobby — the  former  takes 
his  cue  from  the  latter's  telegram 
to  Congress. 


[Science,  Mar.  1,  1912.] 

To  THE  EDITOR  OF  SCIENCE: 

If  Mr.  McLean  will  bring  his  committee 
to  my  office  where  there  is  a  fairly  com- 
plete set  of  rookery  photographs  and 
charts,  he  will  get  a  clearer  understand- 
ing of  the  Pribilof  breeding  grounds  than 
he  has  at  present.  The  fact  is  that  the 
innocent  ('amp  Fire  Club  is  being  used 
by  the  unscrupulous  lobby  which  has 
always  been  kept  at  work  by  the  pelagic- 
sealers.  One  excuse  suits  it  as  well  as 
another,  this  time  it  is  the  killing  of  sur- 
plus males.  It  is  a  pity  that  year  after 
year  it  should  succeed  in  getting  the 
support  of  men  of  good  standing  who  hap- 
pen to  be  ignorant  of  the  real  facts  in- 
volved. 

C.  H.  TOWNSEND, 
Member  Advisory  Board  Fur  Seal  S  err  ire. 

(Hearing  No.  10,  pp.  597-598,  Apr.  20, 
1912.) 


Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  remember  any 
such  person. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  that  he  is 
connected  with  the  Sealers'  Association,  or 
the  Victoria  Sealers'  Association. 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  No.  sir;  I  have  no  in- 
formation on  the  subject. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  of  any 
business  relation  between  Liebes  &  Co. 
and  the  Victoria  Sealers'  Association? 

Dr.  TOWTNSEND.    No.  sir. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  never  did  dis- 
cover That  as  long  as  you  were  connected 
with  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  was  probably  not  in- 
terested in  it  at  all.  As  furriers,  they 
were  probably  were  interested  in  every 
thing  of  that  kind. 

The  CHAIRMAN'.  Lampson  cfc  Co.  have 
an  agent  with  the  Victoria  Sealers'  Asso- 
ciation, have  they  not0 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  1  can  not  say:  I  do 
not  know. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  the  num- 
ber of  skins  that  were  consigned  by  the 
Victoria  Sealers'  Association  in  lS9o  and 
1896? 

Dr.  TowNHKxn.  Xo.  sir;  but  that  is  a 
matter  of  record,  no  doubt. 

(Hearinir  Xo.  13.  pp.  807.  808.  June  S, 
1912.) 

Townsend  attempts  a  denial  of 
the  responsihility  of  the  deroga- 
tory Osborn-Grant  letter,  while 
Elliott  proves  that  in  1909  he  re- 
fused to  admit  any  "rights"  for 
pelagic  sealers. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes.  Dr.  Townsend.  I 
have  in  my  hand  a  letter  signed  by  Henry 
Fairfield  Osborn  and  Madison  Grant, 
president  and  chairman  of  the  New  York 
Zoological  Society,  general  office,  No.  11 
Wall  Street,  dated  February  8,  1912,  ad- 
dressed to  the  Hon.  W.  S.  Goodwin,  Com- 
mittee on  Foreign  Affairs,  Washington, 
D.  C.  In  this  letter  appears  the  follow- 
ing paragraph: 

"Mr.  Henry  W.  Elliott,  who  holds 
views  opposite  to  the  foregoing,  is  and 
has  been  for  many  years  a  man  entirely 
discredited  in  the  scientific  world  and 
is  not  taken  seriously  by  anyone  who  haa 
followed  his  record  in  connection  with 
this  subject  during  the  past  18  years. 
We  believe  that  those  who  have"  sup- 
ported him  in  this  unnecessary  and  sense- 
less agitation,  which  has  been  solely  in- 
stigated by  him.  have  been  grossly  mis- 
led." 

I  ask  if  you  inspired  that  letter? 


FUE-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


205 


PALO  ALTO,  CAL., 

February  o,  191 1. 
Hon.  \\'M.  SUI.ZER, 
House  of  Re  present' i 

\\\l«l,'<n<ltnn.  1> 

To  incorj)orate  a  clause  establishing  in 
fur-seal  bill  a  close  season  prohibiting 
killing  of  superfluous  males  would  do  no 
good  to  herd,  but  would  kill  treaty.  No 
one  knows  this  better  than  ihe  pelagic- 
sealers'  lobby,  which  for  20  years  has 
b«M'ii  led  by  Henry  \V.  Elliott.  * 

DAVID  STARR  JORDAN. 

If.-aring  No.  12.  p.  771,  May  25,  1912.) 


Townsend  and  Lucas  deny  Os- 

born's  letter. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  inspire  the 
letter  which  Henry  Fairfield  Osborn, 
president  of  the  American  Museum  of 
Natural  History,  wrote  to  Chairman 
William  Sulzer?" 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  did  not.  Kindly  note, 
Mr.  Elliott  asked  if  I  inspired  that  letter. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  any- 
thing about  it? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Only  after  it  was  written. 

The  CHAIRMAN. 'Were  you  in  consulta- 
tion about  it  with  anyone? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Xo:  my  advice  was  not 
asked. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Do  you  agree  with  Mr. 
Osborn  in  this  statement: 

XKW  YORK  ZOOLOGICAL  SOCIETY, 

York,  Janunnj  fjg,  1912. 
MY  DEAR  MR.  SULZER:  I  understand 
there  is  a  proposal  to  add  to  the  fur-seal 
bill  drafted  by  the  State  Department  an 


Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Mr.  Chairman,  do  I  un- 
derstand that  this  question  comes  from 
you? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  It  comes  from  me. 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Must  I  submit  to  the 
cross-examination  by  Mr.  Elliott? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  will  just  answer 
the  question. 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  am  not  responsible 
for  the  writings  of  Mr.  Grant  or  Mr.  Os- 
born. I  have  nothing  to  do  with  their 
statements. 

(Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  768,  769,  May  25, 
1912.) 
17  GRACE  AVE.,  LAKEWOOD,  OHIO, 

November  3,  1909. 
Dr.  DAVID  STARR  JORDAN, 

Stanford  University,  Cal. 

DEAR  SIR:  Your  letter  of  the  6th  in- 
stant has  been  duly  received.  With  re- 
gard to  that  appearance  of  my  track  chart 
in  your  report  of  1896,  you  seem  to  be  not 
quite  clear  in  your  mind  as  to  how  it  got 
in  there  as  it  did.  Perhaps  the  following 
statement  of  fact  may  help  you  to  know 
its  publication  there  without  that  credit 
given  to  me  as  its  author  which  is  indis- 
putably mine: 

With  regard  for  the  ''rights"  of  those 
Victorian  sea  wolves,  I  hope  that  they 
will  never  get  a  penny  for  their  rotting 
vessels  or  their  "good  will."  They  have 
had  far,  far  too  much  already  at  the  ex- 
pense of  humanity  and  decency.  Let 
their  vessels  rot,  and  let  their  owners  rot 
with  them. 

Very  truly,  yours, 

HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 

(Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  763,  764,  May  25, 
1912.) 

But  Osborn  says  they  advised 
how  to  write. 

Mr.    ELLIOTT   (reading): 

THE  AMERICAN  MUSEUM 
OF  NATURAL  HISTORY, 
OFFICE  OF  THE  PRESIDENT. 
New  York,  January  22,  1912. 

DEAR  SIR:  As  president  of  the  Ameri- 
can Museum  of  Natural  History,  I  have 
been  securing  the  advice  of  the  expert 
zoologists  of  this  institution,  especially 
of  Dr.  Frederic  A.  Lucas,  who  is  a  trained 
authority  on  the  fur-seal  question.  I 
desire  to  protest  against  the  proposed 
amendment  to  the  fur-seal  bill  (drafted 
by  i  lie  State  Department),  which  amend- 
ment provides  a  15-year  closed  season  on 
male  seals.  This  amendment,  should  it- 
become  law,  would  exterminate  the  great 
seal  herd  of  the  United  States,  and  is 
founded  upon  ignorance  of  the  first 
principles  of  breeding  under  natural  con- 
ditions, and  of  the  artifical  condition- 


206 


FUR-SEAL   HERD    OF   ALASKA. 


amendment  for  a  15-year  closed  season  on 
male  seals. 

This  amendment  is  a  vicious  one, 
which  will  certainly  lead  to  the  complete 
extermination  of  the  seals.  I  understand 
it  was  proposed  by  Mr.  Elliott,  who  has 
no  standing  in  this  country  as  a  zoologist , 
and  I  believe  is  supported  by  my  friend 
Dr.  Hornaday,  who,  I  regret  to  say,  has 
come  under  the  influence  of  Mr.  EUiott. 
Dr.  Hornaday 's  position  in  the  matter  is 
entirely  personal,  and  does  not  in  any 
way  represent  the  judgment  of  the  Now 
York  Zoological  Society.  All  the  zoolo- 
gists of  note  in  this  country,  all  the  scien- 
tific experts  whose  opinions  are  worthy 
of  consideration,  all  the  trained  experts 
who  have  made  a  special  study  of  the  fur- 
seal  problem,  all  naturalists  who  under- 
stand that  an  excess  of  males  is  fatal  in 
both  the  females  and  the  young,  and 
finally  all  those  who  desire  through  in- 
telligent study  of  the  question  from 
motives  of  humanity  as  well  as  from  mo- 
tives to  protect  the  economic  interests  of 
the  United  States,  are  opposed  to  the 
15-year  closed  season. 

The  reason  is  a  very  simple  one,  which 
you  can  yourself  readily  understand, 
namely,  that  there  is  an  unnatural  excess 
of  males  on  the  islands,  due  to  the  fact 
that  pelagic  sealing  has  destroyed  85 
females  out  of  the  100  in  the  herd ;  thus 
the  balance  of  nature  has  been  destroyed . 
When  there  are  not  enough  females  to  go 
around,  the  bulls  will  fight  for  them,  and 
in  doing  so  will  kill  both  the  females  and 
the  pups.  Under  natural  conditions  of 
breeding  there  would  be  an  equal  number 
of  females  and  males;  nature  takes  care  of 
these  things,  but  the  pelagic  sealers  have 
produced  a  set  of  new  and  entirely  arti- 
ficial conditions;  consequently  the  pro- 
posal of  the  United  States  Fish  Commis- 
sion experts  to  keep  down  the  resulting 
excess  of  males,  and  thus  to  restore 
gradually  the  balance  which  nature  has 
instituted  for  all  time  between  the  sexes 
is  the  only  one  wrhich  will  preserve  this 
great  herd . 

I  have  given  this  matter  very  prolonged 
study  and  have  read  all  the  documents, 
and  I  regret  to  say  that  your  committee 
has  been  given  a  great  amount  of  misin- 
formation under  the  guise  of  sentiment 
for  the  protection  of  these  animals.  I  am 
one  of  the  most  ardent  advocates  of  pro- 
tection of  the  wild  animal  life  of  this 
country  and  in  this  spirit  and  in  the 
interests  of  my  country  I  can  not  express 
myself  too  emphatically.  My  opinion  is 
identical  (with  the  exception  of  my 
friend  Dr.  Hornaday)  with  that  of  all 
the  leading  zoologists  and  mammalogists 
of  rank  in  the  United  States,  and  if  you 
desire  I  can  have  prepared  for  your  com- 
mittee at  short  notice  a  document  signed 
by  all  these  men.  The  article  by  Hugh 


which  have  been  brought  about  on  the 
islands  through  prolonged  and  fateful 
pelagic  sealing. 

I  am,  very  respectfully, 
HENRY  FAIRFIELD  OSBORN, 

President . 

Hon.  WILLIAM  SULZER, 

Chairman  Committee  OH  Foreign 
A /airs,  House  of  Representative*, 
Washington)  D . '('. 

I  am  strongly  in  favor  of  the  bill  itself. 

Xo\v,  how  did  he  get  the  idea  that  they 
would  be  exterminated  after  he  had  con- 
ferred with  your  scientific  acumen? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Men  may  confer,  yon 
know,  and  do  some  thing  entirely  different. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  did  he  get  that  im- 
pression, if  not  from  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  do  not  know.  You  will 
find  all  my  publications  entirely  differ- 
ent from  that. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  .So  you  will  not  be  re- 
sponsible for  what  Dr.  Osborn  says? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Not  in  this  case;  certainly 
not. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  Did  you  have  any 
part  in  causing  Dr.  Henry  Fairfield  Os- 
born to  write  to  Hon.  William  Sulzor  a 
letter  dated  January  22,  1912,  in  which 
the  former  tells  the  latter  that  unless  the 
surplus  young  males  are  all  killed  by  man 
these  animals  will,  if  left  alone  by  man, 
grow  up  and  exterminate  the  species  in  a 
few  years?  Did  you  inspire  that  letter? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  That  is  not  such  a  let- 
ter as  I  would  write. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  Do  you  think  he 
stated  it  sensibly  or  correctly? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  No;  I  do  not  think  he 
stated  it  correctly. 

Mr.  MCGILLICUDDY.  Have  you  ever 
made  any  statement  about  it  or  protested 
against  his  statement  of  it? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Only  as  I  have  written 
about  it  since  then;  I  have  not  ventured 
to  criticise  him,  but  I  have  stated  the  case 
with  regard  to  the  seals  very  plainly  a 
number  of  times.  I  have  not  attempted 
to  criticise  him.  (Hearing  No.  12,  pp. 
722,  723,  May  16, 1912  (Lucas's  testimony) ; 
Hearing  No.  13,  pp.  824,  825,  June  8, 
1912  (Townsend's  testimony).) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF    ALASKA. 


207 


M.  Smith.  ,»f  the-  I'nitod  States  Fisheries 
Bureau,  one  of  the  finest  at  and  most 
unprejudiced  and  unbiased  men  of 
science  in  the  country,  iu  the  last  number 
of  the  National  Geographical  Magazine 
exactly  expresses  the  truth  on  this 
subject. 

With  your  permission.  I  should  like  to 
publish  this  letter,  but  will  not  do  so 
without  your  permission. 

With  best  wishes  for  the  prosecution  of 
the  many  grave  and  important  questions 
which  are  before  your  committee,  and 
with   continued    personal   regard.    I   am. 
Sincerely,  yours. 
HKNKY   FAIRFIKI.O  OSBORX. 

President. 

lion.  WILLIAM  SULXF.R. 

Chairman  Hnn*,  Committee  on  For- 
.     House    of   Repre- 
sentatives.   Washington,   D.    C. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  do  not  agree  with  that, 
which  shows  very  plainly  I  did  not  in- 
spire the  letter. 

Townsend,  naturalist,  does  not 
believe  the  natural  law  which 
governs  wild  life  is  the  best;  he 
Snows  better. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Do  you  approve  the 
present  policy,  then,  that  the  Govern- 
ment continue  the  killing? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  approve  that. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  And,  in  your  judgment, 
will  the  seals  increase  under  the  present 
regulations  and  the  present  method  of 
killing  by  the  Government,  in  case 
pelagic  sealing  is  stopped? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Oh,  yes;  they  are 
bound  to  increase.  The  stock  of  breeders 
will  increase,  and  when  the  pelagic  sealers 
stop  killing  the  females  at  sea  there  will 
be  more  pups  born.  The  animals  are 
polygamous,  and  the  males  fight  so  much 
among  themselves  that  they  destroy  a 
part  of  the  crop  of  infant  seals  by  their 
fighting. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Then,  in  your  judgment, 
there  is  nothing  to  be  gained  by  the  cessa- 
tion of  the  killing  of  the  seals,  providing 
the  regulations  are  proper? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  There  is  nothing  to  be 
•gained.  The  male  seals  are  on  shore; 
they  do  not  go  away  to  sea  as  the  females 
do  when  they  are  nursing  their  young,  and 
they  can  be  managed ;  they  can  be  farmed, 
and  the  surplus  stock  of  males  disposed  of 
just  the  same  as  you  dispose  of  the  surplus 
stock  of  any  domestic  animals,  your  sur- 
plus male  stock.  It  is  a  clear-cut  propo- 
sition, and  very  well  understood  by  those 
who  have  been  up  there.  (Hearing  No. 
13.  p.  812.  June  S,  !'.< 


Liebes,  seal  contractor,  has 
carefully  studied  the  question  and 
has  the  same  improvement  over 
natural  law  in  mind. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  think  it  would 
be  better  to  kill  males  not  less  than  3  years 
old  than  to  kill  males  less  than  2  years 
old? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  Well,  naturally,  they  are 
more  valuable;  but  if  there  is  no  pelagic 
sealing  at  all,  then,  naturally,  it  makes  no 
difference  what  you  kill,  except  the 
natural  enemies  they  have  in  the  water. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  But  I  have  always  had 
the  impression,  without  knowing  any- 
thing about  the  subject,  except  what  I 
have  heard  at  these  hearings,  that  it  was 
killing  too  closely  that  would  injure  the 
herd — I  mean,  killing  them  too  young. 

Mr.  LIEBES.  Oh,  no.  As  I  say.  there 
are  too  many  "P's,  "  too  many  professors, 
too  much  politics,  and  too  much  pelagic 
sealing;  that  is  what  is  killing  the  herd 
more  than  anything  else. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  there  any  politics  in 
the  killing  up  there? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  No;  not  up  there,  but  in 
Washington.  You  can  not  run  a  stock 
farm  from  Washington  and  tell  them  what 
is  going  to  happen  next  year.  You  should 
have  men  there  in  whom  you  have  con- 
fidence, and  let  them  run  the  thing.  A 
business  man,  running  a  stock  farm, 
would  not  sit  down  in  Washington  and 
write  a  letter  up  north  telling  them  to  let 
the  stock  run  wild  for  5  or  10  years.  Mv 
Lord,  it  would  be  ruinous:  that  would  kill 
off  the  herd;  they  would  destroy  them- 
selves. (Hearing  No.  13,  p.  878,  June  20, 
1912.) 


208 


FUR-SEAL   HERD    OF   ALASKA. 


One  of  a  hundred  reasons  why. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Dr.  Townsend,  do  you 
know  the  extent  to  which  Liebes  dealt  in 
sealskins? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  could  not  say  that, 
I  know  the  extent;  I  simply  know  they 
were  furriers  interested  in  all  kinds  of 
furs,  especially  seals. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Did  you  know  at  the 
time  that  they  were  the  owners  of  these 
vessels  in  which  this  pirate  turned  up? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  No;  I  never  knew  any- 
thing about  that  until  those  things  were 
brought  out  at  The  Hague. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  It  was  developed  at 
The  Hague  that  the  I.icl>cs  were  the 
owners  of  this  vessel? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Thai  is  my  recollec- 
tion. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  And  I  suppose  that  is 
in  the  public  records? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  Everything,  sir,  that 
is  connected  with  the.  matter  must  be 
between  the  covers  of  that  book  and  be 
between  the  covers  of  some  other  public 
document  in  which  the  matter  was- 
brought  up  a  year  or  so  later  on,  perhaps 
by  Mr.  Elliott.  But  it  is  all  published. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  this  was  brought 
out  at  The  Hague,  what  did  you  advise 
Mr.  Pierce  to  do,  as  his  "expert  pelagic 
sealing  adviser"? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  do  not  know  that  Mr. 
Pierce  ever  asked  me  for  advice  over 
there.  He  instructed  me  to  produce 
certain  documents  that  would  help  him 
refute  claims,  etc.  I  was  a  statistician. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  produce  any 
documents  that  refuted  Liebes's  claim? 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  I  have  no  recollection 
in  regard  to  it.  Whatever  was  done  is  in 
the  book.  (Hearing  No.  1'2.  p.  774.  May 
24,  1912.) 

V. 

*The  sworn  statements  of  Dr.  Frederic  Augustus  Lucas,  who  is  one  of  the  <\>'}>f/-tx  cited  to 
the  United  States  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation  of  National  Resources,  January 
14,  1911,  and  to  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  Department  of  Commerce  and 
Labor,  June  9,  1911,  by  Secretary  Charles  Nagel,  as  his  authority  for  killing  seals  in 
violation  of  the  lair  and  regulations,  to  wit: 

Mr.  BOWERS.  *    *    * 

FUR-SEAL  BOARD, 

BUREAU  or  FISHERIES. 

In  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  general  matters  regarding  the  fur  seals  are  considered  by 
by  a  fur-seal  board,  consisting  of  the  following; 


Townsend  don't  like  Elliott. 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  To  go  back  to  the  sub- 
ject of  the  hearings :  I  have  nothing  to  add 
to  what  has  been  said  by  the  hard-work- 
ing and  efficient  officials  of  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor  whom 
Elliott  has  placed  under  fire.  What  I 
have  written  in  the  past  year  in  Science 
has  already  been  reprinted  in  the  hearings, 
and  my  views  are  there  available. 

I  am  unwilling,  after  20  yeais  of  ac- 
quaintance with  the  ways  of  Elliott,  to 
appear  before  any  committee  in  which 
he  may  be  an  inquisitor,  or  where  he  may 
even  be  present. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  want  to  be  entirely 
fair  to  the  witness,  and  would  suggest 
that  if  there  is  any  place  you  can  dis- 
cover in  any  of  the  hearings  where  Mr. 
Elliott  falsified  or  has  overstepped  the 
truth,  so  far  as  the  chair  is  concerned 
you  are  entirely  at  liberty  to  submit  the 
statement. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  He  should  be  compelled 
to. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  One  moment.  I  sim- 
ply make  that  statement  on  account  of 
the  allegations  in  the  statement  which 
the  witness  has  just  read. 

Dr.  TOWNSEND.  It  would  take  a  good 
deal  of  your  time,  Mr.  Chairman,  to  go 
through  and  point  these  out. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  will  have  to  before 
you  leave  the  city;  I  will  tell  you  that. 
You  will  answer  a  good  many  other  ques- 
tions to-day.  (Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  739, 
740,  May  24,  1912.) 


Dr.  Frederic  A.  Lucas,  Director  of  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History, 
member  of  the  Fur  Seal  Commissions  of  1896  and  1897,  and  one  of  the  keenest,  most 
discerning,  and  best-known  naturalists.  *  *  *  ('Hearing  No.  2,  p.  109,  June  9, 
1911.) 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


209 


THE    DEADLY    PARALLEL. 


Lucas  attempts  to  pass  a 
" doped"  sales  sheet  on  the  com- 
mittee as  a  genuine  sheet. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  May  I  make  a  statement? 
In  all  these  sales  of  skins  the  skins  are  ad- 
vertised by  weight  and  not  by  size. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Are  they  advertised  by 
weight?  Find  an  advertisement  by 
weight  in  the  Lampson  catalogues  and 
you  will  find  something  I  have  never 
been  able  to  find. 

Dr.  LUCAS  (reading): 

"C.  M.  Lampson  &  Co.  exposed  to  sale 
by  auction  at  the  College  Hill  public  sale 
room  on  Friday,  December  15,  1911,  at 
2  o'clock  precisely,  the  following  goods, 
viz,  12,002  skins,  salted  fur  seal,  Alaska." 

Here  follows  the  table: 

"Lot  1,  1  middling  and  small,  10 
pounds,  no  ounces;  98  smalls,  8  pounds, 
4  ounces." 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Since  when  was  that  put 
out? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Last  December. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  a  notation  put  on 
by  somebody  else. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  This  is  a  copy  of  the  list. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  not  the  catalogue 
of  sales  in  London. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  This  is  a  catalogue  of  the 
sales. 

(Mr.  Elliott  takes  paper.) 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  've  got  it  here. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Absolutely;  hand  that 
paper  back  here. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Certainly.  Those  figures 
ought  not  to  have  been  written  on  there. 
They  have  never  been  put  on  in  the  origi- 
nal statement,  and  time  of  sales  of  those 
skin?.  (Hearing  No.  12,  p.  726,  May  16, 
1912.) 


But  he  is  exposed  and  pre- 
vented by  the  presentation  of  a 
genuine  sneet. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Show  me  one  where  they 
are  not  in. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I've  got  it  right  here. 
You  can  look  over  the  London  sides  cata- 
logues of  the  Lampsons  like  this  one  for 
20  years,  and  you  can  find  neither  weight 
nor  measurement. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Then  they  don't  mean  any- 
thing. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  They  do  ''mean  any- 
thing. ? '  How  do  you  suppose  these  skins 
are  classified? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  By  weight. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No,  sir.  How  could  they 
classify  them  by  weight— get  the  size  by 
weight? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Aren't  you  willing  to  say 
that  they  are  classified  by  weight? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No;  because  Mr.  Fraser 
says,  on  pages  30  to  33  of  hearing  No.  1, 
that  they  are  classified  by  measurement. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  do  not  suppose  that 
the  people  who  deal  in  skins  care  so  much 
about  the  weight  as  the  size.  It  is  the  size 
which  is  needed  to  cover  a  person's  back, 
isn't  it? 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  I  do  not  know  how  they 
classify  them.  There  seems  to  be  a  differ- 
ence in  these  copies.  If  this  is  genuine 
that  the  doctor  has,  it  seems  to  me  that 
they  sometimes  do  put  in  the  figures  of 
of  \veights  and  sometimes  they  do  not  put 
them  in. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  They  never  have.  I  have 
the  whole  series  of  catalogues  for  20  years. 
That  is  a  notation  made  by  somebody  else, 
exactly  as  I  might  make  a  notation  on  it 
now  and  here. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  would  like  to  ask  one 
question,  which  is  if  these  skins  are  sold 
by  measurement  why  is  it  that  they  are 
always  alluded  to  in  the  sales  and  on  the 
lists  of  seals  taken  as  weighing  so  much? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  never  known  of 
them  being  alluded  to  in  that  way  in  the 
sales.  Here  is  the  sales  catalogue  of  the 
Lampsons'  last  sale,  December  29,  1911. 
There  is  not  the  slightest  allusion  to 
measurement  or  weight  there.  They  are 
all  classified  by  measurements,  which 
govern  the  sizes  of  "small  pups, "  "mid- 
dling pups,"  etc. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  There  seems  to  be  a 
variation  in  these  statements.  Is  the 
original  document  here? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Here  it  is.  I  will  put  it 
right  in  if  you  like  [handing  paper  to 
chairman].  (Hearing  No.  12,  p.  727,  May 
16,  1912.) 


21588—1J 


210 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


The  "doped"  sales  sheet  of  London  broker, 
which  Lucas  presented  as  genuine. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  that  correct? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No;  I  have  the  same  thing 
of  that  very  sale,  which  came  from  Mr. 
Fraser,  Lampson  &  Co.'s  agent  in  New 
York. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  do  not  dispute  the  nota- 
tions; but,  Fraser  did  not  attend  the  sale; 
he  has  made  them  outside. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  would  suggest  that 
we  print  both  statements  in  the  record 
and  compare  them  afterwards.  These 
twp  statements  may  be  marked  ' '  Exhibit 
A,"  submitted  by  Dr.  Lucas,  and  "Ex- 
hibit B,"  offered  by  Mr.  Elliott. 
.  The  documents  referred  to  are  as  fol- 
lows: 

"EXHIBIT  A. 

"C.  M.  Lampson  &  Co.  exposed  to  sale  by 
auction  at  the  College  Hill  public  sales- 
room on  Friday,  December  15,  1911,  at 
2  o'clock  precisely,  the  following  goods, 
viz,  12,002  salted  fur-seal  skins,  Alaska. 
Prompt,  December  29,  1911. 

"The  purchasers  are  particularly  re- 
quested to  have  some  one  in  attendance 
to  superintend  the  counting,  as  no 
1  claim  for  deficiencies  can  be  allowed 
after  the  goods  have  been  counted  and 
delivered  from  the  warehouse." 


The   genuine   sales   sheet    of  the    London 
broker,  given  to  committee. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Where  does  thi.<  list 
that  you  have  come  from? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  From  Lampson's  agent  in 
New  York. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  would  suggest  that 
we  print  both  statements  in  the  record 
and  compare  them  afterwards.  These 
two  statements  may  be  marked  "Exhibit 
A,"  submitted  by' Dr.  Luca.s,  and  "Ex- 
hibit B,"  offered  by  Mr.  Elliott. 


The  documents  referred  to  are  as  fol- 
lows: 

"EXHIBIT  B. 

''C.  M.  I.ainpson  cV:  Co.  Exposed  to  sale 
by  auction  at  the  College  Hill  public 
sale  room  on  Friday,  December  15, 1911, 
at  2  o'clock  precisely,  the  following 
goods,  viz,  12,002  salted  fur-seal  skins, 
Alaska.  Prompt,  December  29,  1911. 

"The  purchasers  are  particularly  re- 
quested to  have  some  one  in  attendance 
to  superintend  the  counting,  as  no  claim 
for  deficiencies  can  be  allowed  after  the 
goods  have  been  counted  and  delivered 
from  the  warehouse." 


12,002  SKINS,   SALTED   FUR   SEAL,   ALASKA. 

[In  cold  storage  at  New  Hibernia  Wharf.  Samples 
at  C.  M.  Lampson  &  Co.'s  warehouse,  64  Queen 
Street,  E.G.  At  per  skin,  to  advance  Is.  Buy- 
ers are  requested  to  note  that  all  skins  are  stamped 
"L  A"  on  the  right  cheek.] 


Lot  No. 

Shil- 
lings. 

Number  and  kind. 

Weight. 

Lotl  

224 

fl  middling  and  small.. 
\98  smalls 

Lbs.  oz. 
10    0 
8    4 

Ml- 

202 
206 

80  large  pups  
do 

7    4 

Lot  4 

206 

do 

Lot  5  

206 

.do... 

Lot  6  

206 

69  large  pups  

Lot?  
Lot8.... 

174 
174 

90  middling  pups  
do 

6    8 

Lot  9 

172 

do 

Lot  10  

172 

do 

Lot  11 

172 

do 

Lot  12  
Lpt  13  

172 
172 

do  

do 



Lot  14 

172 

do 

Lot  15  

172 

do 

Lot  16 

172 

do 

Lqtl7  

172 

...do... 

Lot  18    .. 

170 

do 

Lot  19  
Lot  20.... 

170 
170 

do  

do  . 

Lot  21  
Lot  22  

170 
168 

do  

do 

Lot  23  

168 

105  middling  pups  

Lot  24... 

130 

100  small  pups 

5    13 

Lot  25.... 

128 

do 

12,002  SKINS,   SALTED  FUR  SEAL,   ALASKA. 

[In  cold  storage  at  New  Hibernia  Wharf.  Samples 
at  C.  M.  Lampson  &  Co.'s  warehouse,  64  Queen 
Street,  E.  C.  At  per  skin,  to  advance  Is.  Buy- 
ers are  requested  to  note  that  all  skins  are  stamped 
"  L  A"  on  the  right  cheek.] 


Lot  No. 

Shillings. 

Number  and  kind. 

Lot  1  

224 

(1     middling     and 
4    small. 

Lot  2... 

202 

198  small. 
80  large  pups 

Lot  3 

206 

Do 

Lot  4  

206 

Do. 

Lots 

206 

Do 

Lot  6... 

206 

69  large  pups. 

Lot  7 

174 

90  middling  pups 

Lot8... 

174 

Do. 

Lot  9  

172 

Do. 

Lot  10 

172 

Do 

Lot  11  

172 

Do. 

Lot  12 

172 

Do 

Lot  13  

172 

Do. 

Lot  14      .   . 

172 

Do. 

Lot  15 

172 

Do 

Lot  16  

172 

Do. 

Lot  17 

172 

Do 

Lot  18  

170 

Do. 

Lot  19 

170 

Do 

Lot  20... 

170 

Do. 

Lot  21  

170 

Do. 

Lot  22 

168 

Do 

Lot  23... 

168 

105  middling  pups. 

Lot  24. 

130 

100  small  pups 

Lot  25  

128 

Do. 

(Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  728,  729,  Mav  16. 
1912.) 


(Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  731,  732,  May  16, 
1912.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


211 


Lucas  declares  that  the  size  of 
the  skin  has  nothing  to  do  with  its 
classification. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  You  are  also  doubtless  fa- 
miliar with  the  fact  that  the  classification 
of  the  seals  in  the  sales  has  absolutely 
nothing  to  do  with  actual  ages  and  sizes. 
(Hearing  No.  12,  p.  708,  Mar.  16,  1912.) 


Lucas  swears  that  the  green 
skins  weigh  more  than  when 
salted. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  For  example,  you  will  find 
large  pups  here  whose  skins  weighed  7 
pounds  4  ounces,  the  size  of  either  an  aver- 
age 2-year-old  or  a  small  3-year-old  seal; 
middling  paps  weighing  6  pounds  4  ounces, 
the  size  of  a  3-year  old.  And  if  these  seal- 
skins follow  the  rule  of  other  skins — and  I 
have  handled  a  great  many  hundreds  of 
skins — they  will  weigh  less  at  the  London 
sales  after  being  salted  than  they  will 
weigh  fresh  on  the  islands,  because  when  a 
skin  is  salted  the  salt  takes  the  moisture 
out  of  it  and  it  comes  to  the  sale  in  a  semi- 
dry  condition.  (Hearing  No.  12,  p.  708, 
May  16.  1912. 


But  the  London  sales  agent 
says  that  its  size  does  determine 
it,  by  measurement  so  classed. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MR.   ALFRED  FRASER. 

(The  witness  was  duly  sworn  by  the 
chairman.) 

Mr.  FRASER.  Yes.  I  was  in  the  fur 
business,  being  a  member  of  the  firm  of 
C.  M.  Lampson  &  Co. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  For  how  many  years 
did  you  say  you  were  connected  with  that 
company? 

Mr.  FRASER.  I  was  connected  with 
them  since  1865. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  was  your  busi- 
ness as  their  representative? 

Mr.  FRASER.  I  took  care  of  their  busi- 
ness in  New  York. 

The  CHAIRMAN  .  If  you  will  kindly  send 
us  a  catalogue  I  will  look  it  over  and  sub- 
mit it  to  the  committee.  Prof.  Elliott, 
do  you  want  to  ask  any  question? 

Mr.  ELLI9TT.  Just  one  question,  not  to 
criticise  Mr.  Fraser,  because  he  has  told 
the  exact  truth  [reading] : 

"The  London  classification  of  skins  is 
based  upon  the  length  of  the  skin,  and 
then  weight  (p.  916,  vol.  8,  Proceedings  of 
the  Bering  Sea  Tribunal)." 

Mr.  FRASER.  That  is  so;  I  do  not  dis- 
pute that.  (Hearing  No.  1,  pp.  29,  33, 
June  2,  1911.) 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  London  people  knew 
nothing,|and  still  know  nothing,  about  the 
age  of  seals,  and  they  cared  nothing,  about 
it.  They  were  interested  in  the  size  and 
the  quality.  They  ascertained  and 
formed  their  idea  of  the  skin's  value  pri- 
marily by  its  measurement,  and,  secondly, 
by  its  weight.  The  weight  would  vary. 
Sometimes  more  salt  and  blubber  are  used 
and  sometimes  less.  But  the  measure- 
ments were  reasonably  steady  and  con- 
stant. They  measure  their  sealskins. 
We  weighed  ours  on  the  islands.  (Hearing 
No.  1,  p.  12,  May  31,  1911.) 

The  London  authority  declares 
that  the  salted  skins  are  heaviest, 
and  the  island  records  confirm  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  will  go  further,  and  sub- 
mit as  Exhibit  J  this  paper.  I  won't  read 
all  of  this  in  regard  to  the  British  authority 
on  Alaskan  fur-seal  classification  and  what 
he  says,  as  compared  with  our  tables;  but 
1  will  read  one  word  from  a  chief  British 
authority  in  an  official  letter  written  De- 
cember 21.  1892,  by  Sir  Curtis  Lampson's 
sons  to  the  British  commissioners,  Sir 
George  Baden- Powell  and  Dr.  Georp>  M. 
Dawson.  Sir  Curtis  I^ampson  says: 

"  We  are  unable  to  answer  your  inquiry 
as  to  in  what  class  in  the  sales  catalogue 
would  be  placed  a  skin  classified  on  the 
islands  as,  say,  a  7-pound  skin,  as  we  do  not 


212 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Lucas  weighed  and  measured 
no  sealskins,  because  this  work 
had  been  done: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Nowhere  in  your  table  is 
there  a  record  of  a  "green  "  skin  weight? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Not  in  my  table.  No;  ex- 
cept the  one  I  think  of,  one  skin  only. 
The  weight  had  been  very  carefully  taken 
by  Government  agents  and  others,  and  it 
was  a  part  of  the  work  we  did  not  deem  it 
necessary  to  take. 

"There  is  a  large  amount  of  evidence 
bearing  on  these  facts  collected  by  Messrs. 
Judge  and  Lembkey,  and  I  have  perfect 
faith  in  their  observations  from  my  per- 
sonal knowledge  of  the  men."  (F.  A. 
Lucas  to  Hon.  E.  H.  Townsend,  Feb.  24, 
1912.  Hearing  No.  14,  p.  948.) 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I've  got  it  right  here. 
You  can  look  over  the  London  sales  cata- 
logues of  the  Lampsons  like  this  one  for  20 
years,  and  you  can  find  neither  weight 
nor  measurement. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Then,  they  don't  mean  any- 
thing. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  They  do  "mean  any- 
thing.", How  do  you  suppose  these  skins 
are  classified? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  By  weight. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No,  sir.  How  could  they 
classify  them  by  weight— get  the  size  by 
weight? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Aren't  you  willing  to  say 
that  they  are  classified  by  weight? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No;  because  Mr.  Fraser 
says,  on  pages  30  to  33  of  hearing  No.  1, 
that  they  are  classified  by  measurement. 
(Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  726,  727,  May  16, 
1912.) 


know  whether  the  classification  you  men- 
tion refers  to  the  skins  as  taken 'from  the 
animals  or  after  they  have  been  cured  and 
salted  ready  for  shipment.  The  process  of 
curing  and  salting  must  of  necessity  add 
to  the  weight.  (See  p.  9]  6,  Proceedings  of 
the  Tribunal  of  Arbitration,  vol.  8,  Paris, 
1893.)"  (Hearing  No.  1,  p.  14,  May  31, 
1912.) 

The  London  authority  is  con- 
firmed on  the  Seal  Islands. 

[Official  Journal,  Government  Agent  in  Charge  Seal 
Islands,  St.  Pauls  Island,  Alaska.] 

SATURDAY,  July  23,  1904. 
On  July  18,  107  skins  taken  on  Tolstoi 
were  weighed  and  salted.  To-day  they 
were  hauled  out  of  the  bench  and  re- 
weighed.  At  the  time  of  killing  they 
weighed  705  pounds,  and  on  being  taken 
out  they  weighed  759*  pounds,  a  gain  in 
salting  of  54£  pounds"  or  one-half  pound 
per  skin.  (Entry  made  on  p.  149  by 
W.  I.  Lembkey,  Chief  Special  Agent  in 
Charge  Seal  Islands.) 

But  he  has  never  seen  the  table 
of  one  of  his  associates  which  de- 
nies his  claim  that  the  skins  are 
classified  by  weight : 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  do  you  know  that 
the  weight  determines  the  size? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  The  size  determines  the 
weight. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Does  it? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  The  size  determines  the 
weight. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Are  you  sure  of  that? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Naturally,  to  a  great  extent 
it  does. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Are  you  acquainted  with 
the  tables  of  salted  weights  published  by 
one  of  your  associates,  of  275  skins,  which 
give  a  complete  denial  to  your  statement? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  am  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  have  never  seen  the 
table  of  Mr.  Judge? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  presume  I  have  seen  the 
table,  but  I  never  noticed  it.  (Hearing 
No.  12,  p.  726,  May  16,  1912.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


213 


Lucas  says  that  the  weights 
show  that  no  yearling  skins  are 
taken: 

AMERICAN  MUSEUM 

OF  NATURAL  HISTORY, 
New  York,  February  18,  1912. 

DEAR  SIR:  Noticing  your  remark  on 
page  2168  of  the  Congressional  Record 
lor  February  14,  I  take  the  liberty  of  say- 
ing that  the  weights  of  the  sealskins 
(catches  1909  and  1910),  as  published  by 
the  Government  agents  and  in  the 
report  of  the  London  fur  sales,  show 
conclusively  that  there  has  been  no  sys- 
tematic killing  of  undersize  fur  seals — 
that  probably  none  is  under  2  years  of 
age. 

As  you  doubtless  are  aware,  the  largest 
seals  of  any  given  year  may  be,  and  fre- 
quently are,  larger  than  seals  born  the 
year  previous,  so  that  there  is  an  overlap- 
ping of  sizes  and  weights. 

I  base  the  above  statements  on  my  own 
observations,  on  the  reports  of  Mr. 
Judge  and  Mr.  Lembkey,  and  on  the  state- 
ments published  by  Mr.  Elliott  in  his 
report  of  1873.  I  confess  that  I  quote 
Mr.  Elliott  with  some  hesitancy,  because, 
as  I  wrote  the  Hon.  Mr.  Sulzer,  he 
does  not  know  the  difference  between  a 
2-year-old  and  a  3-year-old  seal.  My 
reason  for  this  statement  is  that  subse- 
quent to  1890  Mr.  Elliott  published  a 
"field  diagram,"  in  which  he  includes 
certain  seals  marked  "2-year-olds,"  or 
"nubiles."  Two-year-old  females  do  not 
occur  on  the  rookeries  and  very  few  are 
on  the  islands  in  June.  The  bulk  of 
them  arri  ve  in  July  and  August  after  the 
rookery  system  has  been  broken  up,  as  is 
well  shown  in  photographs.  The  young- 
est seals  in  the  harems  are  3-year-olds. 
I  am,  faithfully  yours, 

F.  A.  LUCAS. 

Hon.  EDWARD  W.  TOWNSEND, 
Committee  on  Foreign  A /fairs. 

House  of  Representatives, 
Washington,  D.  C. 

Lucas  swears  that  the  weight 
of  the  skin  determines  its  size: 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes:  *  *  *  Now,  Dr. 
Lucas,  when  you  take  the  skin  off  of  that- 
yearling  seal,  and  salt  it  down,  how  long 
is  it? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  do  not  know.  I  have 
never  measured  a  skin  after  salting. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  never  measured  it 
before  salting,  did  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  never  measured  the  skin 
before  salting. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Neither  before  or  after. 
Then  how  do  you  know  that  in  the  kill- 
ing up  there  they  are  not  killing  yearling 
seals? 


But  cross-examination  makes 
him  admit  that  he  does  not  know 
what  the  weights  are: 

(Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  948,  949,  July  25, 
1912.) 

Mi\  ELLIOTT.  Never  mind  the  female. 
Did  you  measure  the  skin  and  weigh  it? 

Dr*  LUCAS.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Nowhere  in  your  table  is 
there  a  record  of  a  "green"  skin  weight? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Not  in  my  table.     No. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  your  record  stands, 
of  course. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  This  record  as  printed 
stands. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes;  I  find  no  fault  with 
that  record,  either.  It  is  exactly  as  I 

Sublished  it  nearly  40  years  before.  Now, 
r.  Lucas,  when  you  take  the  skin  off  of 
that  yearling  seal,  and  salt  it  down,  how 
long  is  it? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  do  not  know.  I  have 
never  measured  a  skin  after  salting. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  never  measured  it 
before  salting,  did  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  never  measured  the  skin 
before  salting. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Neither  before  or  after. 
Then  how  do  you  know  that  in  the  killing 
up  there  they  are  not  killing  yearling 
seals? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  By  the  weight  of  the  skins. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  do  you  know  that 
the  weight  determines  the  size? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  The  size  determines  the 
weight. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Does  it? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  The  size  determines  the 
weight.  (Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  725,  726, 
May  16,  1912.) 


Proof  instantly  produced  that 
it  does  not: 

There  are  134  skins  thus  listed  above, 
every  one  of  which  is  not  to  exceed  34^ 
inches  long.  If  those  small  skins  had  all 
been  properly  skinned,  no  one  of  them 
would  weigh 'more  than  5  pounds  green 
and  three-fourths  of  them  would  not  ex- 
ceed 4£  pounds.  Yet  we  find  that  they 
all  have  been  so  loaded  with  blubber, 
when  fresh  skinned,  that  with  the  ex- 
ception of  18  skins,  they  are  weighing  as 
as  much  and  even  more  than  properly 
skinned  2-year  old  seal  pelts  do,  and 
many  of  them  weigh  into  the  3  year-old 
class". 


214 


FUR-SEAL   HERD    OF   ALASKA. 


Dr.  LUCAS.  By  the  weight  of  the 
skins. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  do  you  know  that 
the  weight  determines  the  size? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  The  size  determines  the 
weight. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Does  it? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  The  size  determines  the 
weight.  (Hearing  No.  12,  pp.  725,  726, 
May  16,  1912.) 

The  following  was  contributed  by  Dr. 
Lucas  to  the  New  York  Times  of  Febru- 
ary 23,  1912: 

"THE  FUR  SEAL  HERD. 

"To   the   EDITOR   OF   THE    NEW    YORK 

TIMES: 

"Since  my  name  appears  in  your  edi- 
torial article  on  the  fur  seal  question, 
may  I  have  space  to  state  my  opinions? 

"Finally,  the  published  figures  of  the 
London  sales  show  conclusively  that 
there  has  been  no  systematic  killing  of 
anything  below  the  two-year  olds,  and 
not  so  very  many  of  those.  All  reports  to 
the  contrary  are  absolutely  false. 

"It  should  also  be  stated  that  the 
terms  'pups,'  'small  pups,'  and  'extra 
small  pups'  are  dealers'  terms  and  have 
nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the  actual 
ages  of  the  seals.  Also,  that  sealskins 
weighed  in  London,  after  being  salted 
and  half-way  dried,  weigh  less  than  they 
do  when  freshly  taken  from  the  seals,  as 
thev  are  weighed  at  the  islands. 

"F.  A.  LUCAS, 

"Member  of  the  Fur  Seal  Commis- 
sion of  1896  and  1897; 
"Member   of  the   Advisory   Board, 
Fur  Seal  Service." 

Lucas  says  that  Merriam  and 
himself  have  some  "  exact  knowl- 
edge": 

AMERICAN  MUSEUM  OF 

NATURAL  HISTORY, 
New  York,  February  24,  1912. 

DEAR  SIR:  Absence  from  the  city  has 
delayed  my  replying  to  your  favor  of  Feb- 
ruary 21,  which  I  am  very  glad  to  receive. 

Let  me  say,  first,  that  my  exact  knowl- 
edge in  regard  to  the  killing  of  seals  under 
2  years  of  age  during  the  years  1909  and 
1910  must,  like  that  of  others  who  did  not 
Bee  the  actual  killing,  be  based  on  the 
published  statement  of  their  weights.  In 
addition,  however,  I  have  my  own  expe- 
rience to  aid  in  translating  these  weights. 
The  advisory  board  recommended  that  no 
sealskins  under  5  pounds  in  weight  be 
taken,  this  being  the  average  weight  of  a 
2-year-old  skin.  The  weight  given  by  El- 
liott in  1875  was  (see  postscript)  5^  pounds, 
but  this  was  based  on  an  average  of  only 
10  skins.  There  is  a  bare  possibility  that 


As  an  instance  of  that  falsification  in 
those  weights  above  listed,  No.  4612  is 
32  inches  long  and  is  so  blubbered  that 
it  weighs  8  pounds  4f  ounces,  and  No. 
4244  is  also  only  32  inches  long — same 
size — yet,  not  blubbered,  weighs  but  4 
pounds  3|  ounces. 

These  two  small  yearling  skins  show 
beyond  dispute  that  no  classification  of 
these  skins  by  weight  can  be  sensibly  or 
honestly  made.  (Report  Agents  H.  Com. 
on  Exp.  Dept.  Commerce,  Aug.  31,  1913, 
p.  107.) 


But  Merriam  swears  that  he  has 
no  knowledge  whatever : 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Doctor,  while  you  were 
on  the  island  did  you  ascertain  the  length 
and  weight  of  a  yearling  seal? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Do  you  know  anything 
about  the  length  and  the  weight  of  a  year- 
ling sealskin? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  Nothing. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  make  any  meas- 
urements up  there? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  do  not  remember  off- 
hand. I  examined  a  great  many  pup 
seals  for  sex. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  did  not  measure  the 
yearlings,  Doctor. 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  measured  or  at  leasi 
weighed  some  of  the  seals,  but  I  do  not 
remember  offhand. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  published  any 
record  of  it. 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  think  not. 


FUK-SEAL    HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


215 


those  might  be  short  3-vear-olds,  but  I 
will  let  the  mailer  si  and  as  staled.  Ac- 
cording to  thf  observations  of  Dr.  Mer- 
riam  and  myself,  there  is  about  20  per 
cent  variation  from  the  average  either 
way,  *o  that  some  2-year-old  sealskins 
would  weigh  but  4  pounds  and  others 
would  weigh  H  pounds. 

Pardon  me  for  troubling  you  with  a 
number  of  explanatory  details,  but  I  wish 
above  all  things  to  make  it  clear  that  I  am 
not  speaking  by  hearsay,  or  making  state- 
ments without  foundation,  but  that  I  am 
writing  of  matters  with  which  I  have  di- 
rect acquaintance. 

Faithfully,  yours. 

F.  A.  LUCAS. 

Hon.  EDWARD  W.  TOWN-SEND. 
Committee  on  the  Library, 

House  of  Representatives. 

(Hearing  Xo.  14,  pp.  947,  948,  Julv  2o, 
1912.) 

Lucas  swears  that  he  believes 
5^  pounds  is  the  "good  average" 
of  a  2-year-old  skin. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  In  regard  to  the  sizes  and 
ages  of  killable  seals,  Dr.  Evermann  has 
pointed  out  in  his  admirable  resume  that 
there  is  no  law  against  the  killing  of  male 
seals  of  any  age.  There  have  been  regu- 
lations against  it,  but  all  I  can  say  is  that 
no  yearlinirs  have  been  systematically 
killed.  I  "took  Mr.  Elliott's  figures  of 
1873  as  a  good  average.  He  cites  the 
weight  of  2-year-old  skins  as  5£  pounds. 
I  agree  with 'him  there.  I  think  that  is  a 
good  average.  I  might  say  that  I  have 
not  weighed  any  sealskins  myself.  (Hear- 
ing Xo.  12.  p.  708.  May  16/1912.) 


Lucas  records  the  appearance 
of  2-year-old  cows,  or  nubiles,  on 
the  breeding  grounds  at  the  height 
of  the  breeding  season  July  14-20, 
1897: 


JULY  14,  1897. 

I  made  a  count  of  Ardiguen  this  morn- 
ing with  Mr.  Macoun.     *     *     * 

Three  or  four  bulls  with  2-year-old  cows 
were  seen  on  Zapadine  this 'afternoon. 
(F.  A.  LUCAS.) 


JULY  20,  1897. 

There  is  nothing  in  the  condition  of  the 
harems  to  warrant  the  supposition  that  the 
3-year-old  cows  are  the  cause  of  the  height 
of  the  season  on  the  rookeries.  It  is  evi- 
dent also  that  the  2-vear-olds  are  alreadv 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Xo,  and  therefore  you 
made  no  record  that  we  could  get  hold  of 
to-day? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  doubt  if  I  measured 
any  of  the  2-year-old  seals. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  never  been  able  to 
find  it.  Therefore,  you  have  no  record  of 
the  leneth  and  weight  of  a  yearling  seal? 

Dr.  MERRIAM.  I  think  I  have  none.  I 
think  I  have  weights  and  measurements 
of  p'ips,  but  not  of  yearling  seals.  (Hear- 
ing Xo.  11,  p.  699,  May  4,  1912.) 


But  Lucas  recommends,  No- 
vember 23, 1909,  a  lower  weight,  5 
pounds,  for  a  2-year-old  skin. 

Mr.  PATTON.  These  recommendations 
were  made  to  your  bureau? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Yes. 

Mr.  PATTON.  And  were  not  made  by 
you  at  all? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Xo,  sir. 

Mr.  PATTON.  But  were  made  by  this 
advisory  board? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Yes,  sir.     [Reading:] 

"It  is  recommended  that,  for  the  pres- 
ent, no  fur-seal  skin  weighing  more  than 
8J  pounds  or  less  than  5  pounds  shall  be 
taken,  and  that  not  more  than  95  per  cent 
of  the  3-year-old  male  seals  be  killed  in 
any  one  year."  (Hearing  No.  2,  p.  Ill, 
June  9,  1911.) 

Lucas  denies  the  appearance  of 
2-year-old  cows,  or  nubiles,  on 
the  breeding  grounds  at  the  time 
of  breeding  3  and  4  year  olds  are 
there.  They  are  not  there  at  the 
breeding  season,  in  July : 

AMERICAN  MUSEUM  OF 

XATURAL  HISTORY, 
New  York,  February  18,  1912. 
DEAR  SIR:  Noticing  your  remark  on 
page  2168  of  the  Congressional  Record  for 
February  14,  I  take  the  liberty  of  saying 
that  as  to  the  question  of  2-year-old  fe- 
males not  occurring  on  the  rookeries,  I 
may  say  that  the  yearlings  and  the  2-year- 
olds  come  to  the  islands  late.  Pardon  me 
for  saying  that  this  statement  of  mine  is 
borne  out  by  the  observations  of  all  nat- 
uralists who  have  been  on  the  Pribilof 
Islands. 


216 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


present  in  considerable  numbers.  It 
seems  more  likely  that  the  advent  of  these 
classes  of  seals  depends  upon  their  ages, 
the  earlier  coming  into  heat  earlier  as 
2-year  olds,  and  bearing  their  pups  earlier 
as  3-year-olds. 

(F.  A.  LUCAS  AND  GEO.  A.  CLARK.) 
(Fur  Seal  Investigations,  part  2,  1898, 
pp.  557,  566.) 


Lucas  l  says  that  the  virgin  or 
2-year-old  cows  do  not  come  on 
the  breeding  rookeries. 

AMERICAN  MUSEUM  OF 

NATURAL  HISTORY. 
New  York,  February  18,  1912. 
DEAR  SIR:  Noticing   your   remark   on 
page  2168  of  the  Congressional  Record  for 
February  14,  I  take  the  liberty  of  saying 
that  the  weights  of  the  sealskins  (catches 
1909  and  1910),  as  published  by  the  Gov- 

*  Dr.  Evermann.  Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan.  His 
associate,  whose  name  I  am  now  reading;  "Dr.  F. 
A.  Lucas,  director  of  the  American  Museum  of 
Natural  History,  New  York  City,  member  of  the 
fur-seal  commissions  of  1896  and  1897,  when  he  spent 
about  four  months  on  the  Seal  Islands,  devoting  the 
entire  time  to  a  study  of  the  rookeries  and  hauling 
grounds.  Dr.  Lucas  is  one  of  the  keenest  and  most 
conservative  of  American  zoologists.'' 


I  confess  that  I  quote  Mr.  Elliott  with 
some  hesitancy,  because,  as  I  wrote  the 
honorable  Mr.  Sulzer,  he  does  not  know 
the  difference  between  a  2-year-old  and 
a  3-year-old  seal.  My  reason  for  this 
statement  is  that  subsequent  to  1890  Mr. 
Elliott  published  a  "field  diagram,"  in 
which  he  includes  certain  seals  marked 
"2-year-olds,"  or  "nubiles."  Two- year- 
old  'females  do  not  occur  on  the  rookeries 
and  very  few  are  on  the  islands  in  June. 
The  bulk  of  them  arrive  in  July  and 
August  after  the  rookery  system  has  been 
broken  up,  as  is  well  shown  in  photo- 
graphs. The  youngest  seals  in  the 
harems  are  3-y ear-olds. 

I  am,  faithfully  yours, 

F.  A.  LUCAS. 

Hon.  EDWARD  W.  TOWNSEND, 
Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs, 
House  of  Representatives, 
Washington,  D.  C. 

[NOTE. — This  letter  confessing  the 
strange  "scientific"  ignorance  of  the 
writer  of  the  fact  that  those  nubiles  do 
appear  on  the  breeding  rookeries  when 
the  breeding  season  is  not  broken  up,  and 
only  appear  then,  is  a  sad  revelation  of 
nonsense  on  the  part  of  Lucas  as  an  inves- 
tigator. No  breeding  of  any  kind  takes 
place  after  that  date  or  before,  viz,  July 
4-25  annually,  to  any  noteworthy  extent; 
none  whatever  after  August  1. — 
H.  W.  E.] 

But *  Jordan  finds  them  there 
just  as  Elliott  found  and  described 
them  in  1872-1874. 


OFFICIAL  JOURNAL  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 
AGENT'S  OFFICE. 

ST.  PAUL  ISLAND.  ALASKA. 

Friday.  July  31.  1896. 
Dr.  Jordan  found  two  2-year-old  virgin 
seal  cows  on  the  Reef  Rookery,  which  he 
killed  for  scientific  research. 

1  Dr.  Evermann  (reading):  "Dr.  David  Stan- 
Jordan,  president  of  Stanford  University,  chairman 
of  the  fur-seal  commissions  of  1896  and  1897,  and 
who,  in  company  with  his  associates,  spent  the 
seasons  of  those  two  years  on  our  Seal  Islands  and 
on  the  Russian  islands,  visiting  every  rookery  and 
every  hauling  ground  and  studying  the  fur  seal  from 
every  important  point  of  view.  Besides  spending 
several  months  actually  on  the  islands,  he  spent 
many  more  months  in  collating  and  studying  the 
data  resulting  from  his  own  observations  and  those 
of  his  associates  and  in  a  study  of  the  literature  of  the 
subject. 

"Mr.  George  A.  Clark,  of  Stanford  University,  sec- 
retary to  the  fur-seal  commissions  of  1896  and  1897  and 
special  investigator  on  the  Seal  Islands  during  the 
entire  season  of  1909.  Mr.  Clark  has  had  a  wider 
experience  in  enumerating  the  seal  herd  than  any 
other  man  and  is  one  of  the  most  careful  observers 
who  has  ever  visited  the  Seal  Sslands." 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


217 


eminent  agents  and  in  the  report  of  the 
London  fur  sales,  show  conclusively  that 
there  has  been  no  systematic  killing  of 
undersize  fur  seals — that  probably  none 
is  under  '2  years  of  age. 

As  you  doubtless  are  aware,  the  largest 
seals  of  any  given  year  may  be.  and  fre- 
quently are.  larger  than  seals  born  the 
year  previous,  so  that  there  is  an  overlap- 
ping of  sizes  and  weights. 

I  base  the  above  statements  on  my  own 
observations,  on  the  reports  of  Mr.  Judge 
and  Mr.  Lombkey,  and  on  the  statements 
published  by  Mr.  Elliott  in  his  report  of 
1873.  I  confess  that  I  quote  Mr.  Elliott 
with  some  hesitancy,  because,  as  I  wrote 
the  honorable  Mr.  Sulzer,  he  does  not 
know  the  difference  between  a  2-year-old 
and  a  3-year-old  seal.  My  reason  for  this 
statement  is  that .  subsequent  to  1890 
Mr.  Elliott  published  a  "field  diagram," 
in  which  he  includes  certain  seals  marked 
"2-year-olds,"  or  "nubiles."  Two-year- 
old  females  do  not  occur  on  the  rookeries 
and  very  few  are  on  the  islands  in  June. 
The  bulk  of  them  arrive  in  July  and 
August  after  the  rookery  system  has  been 
broken  up,  as  is  well  shown  in  photo- 
graphs. The  youngest  seals  in  the  harems 
are  3-year-olds. 

I  am.  faithfully,  yours, 

F.  A.  LUCAS. 

Hon.  EDWARD  W.  TOWNSEXD, 
Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs, 

House  of  Representatives, 

Washington,  D.  C. 

[NOTE. — This  letter  confessing  the 
strange  "scientific"  ignorance  of  the 
writer  of  the  fact  that  those  nubiles  do 
appear  on  the  breeding  rookeries  when 
the  breeding  season  is  not  broken  up, 
and  only  appear  then,  is  a  sad  revelation 
of  nonsense  on  the  part  of  Lucas  as  an 
investigator.  No  breeding  of  any  kind 
takes  place  after  that  date  or  before,  viz, 
July  4-25  annually,  to  any  noteworthy 
extent:  none  whatever  after  August  1. — 
H.  W.  E.I 

(Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  948,  949,  July  25, 
1912.) 


ST.  PAUL  ISLAND, 

July  1 
GORBATCH: 

There  are  six  little  virgin  cows  in  the 
two  large  harems  under  Rock  12. 

(U.  S.  typed  notes  of  Geo.  A.  Clark,  p. 
256.) 


218 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


Lucas  says  that  the  2-year-old 
cows  do  not  come  out  on  the 
rookeries : 

AMERICAN  MUSEUM 

OF  NATURAL  HISTORY, 
New  York,  February  24,  1912. 

DEAR  SIR:  Absence  from  the  city  has 
delayed  my  replying  to  your  favor  of 
February  21,  which  I  am  very  glad  to 
receive. 

Let  me  say,  first,  that  my  exact  knowl- 
edge in  regard  to  the  killing  of  seals  under 
2  years  of  age  during  the  years  1909  and 
1910  must,  like  that  of  others  who  did  not 
see  the  actual  killing,  be  based  on  the 
published  statement  of  their  weights. 

As  to  the  question  of  2-year-old  females 
not  occurring  on  the  rookeries,  I  may  say 
that  the  yearlings  and  the  2-year-olds 
come  to  the  islands  late.  Pardon  me  for 
saying  that  this  statement  of  mine  is  borne 
out  by  the  observations  of  all  naturalists 
who  have  been  on  the  Pribilof  Islands. 
My  report  on  the  Breeding  Habits  of  the 
Pribilof  Fur  Seal  was  based  on  the  obser- 
vations of  our  entire  party  during  the  two 
seasons  there,  and  are  supported  by  the 
English  naturalists  D'Arcy  W.  Thompson 
and  G.  E.  H.  Barrett  Hamilton.  We 
found,  as  I  have  stated,  that  the  2-year- 
old  female  seals  are  not  in  the  rookeries; 
that  the  majority  of  them  appear  on  the 
islands  after  the  1st  of  August,  and  that 
very  few  are  there  before  the  middle  of 
July.  This  was  one  of  the  distinct  addi- 
tions that  we  were  able  to  make  to  the 
natural  history  of  the  fur  seal,  and  it 
helped  out  in  a  matter  of  which  Mr. 
Elliott,  as  stated  in  his  1873  report,  was 
confessedly  ignorant. 

If  you  would  be  good  enough  to  read  the 
little  items  on  pages  44,  47,  and  53  of  my 
report  on  the  Breeding  Habits  of  the 
Pribilof  Fur  Seals,  I  will  be  much  obliged, 
and  I  trust  that  you  will  kindly  take  the 
necessary  time  to  do  so.  I  sent  Mr.  Flood 
my  last  available  copy  of  this  report,  but 
it  is  included  in  part  3,  Report  of  the  Fur 
Seal  Investigations  for  1896  and  1897, 
which  it  will  be  easy  for  you  to  have 
brought  to  you.  My  other  copies  are 
packed  away  in  boxes,  but  if  I  can  un- 
earth one  I  shall  be  most  happy  to  do  so. 

Pardon  me  for  troubling  you  with  a 
number  of  explanatory  details,  but  I  wish 
above  all  things  to  make  it  clear  that  I  am 
not  speaking  by  hearsay,  or  making  state- 
ments without  foundation,  but  that  I  am 
writing  of  matters  with  which  I  have  a 
direct  acquaintance. 

Faithfully,  yours, 

F.  A.  LUCAS. 

Hon.  EDWARD  W.  TOWNSEND, 
Committee  on  the  Library, 
House  of  Representatives. 

(Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  947,  948,  July  25, 
1912.) 


But  Jordan  finds  them  there  just 
where    Elliott   said   they   were   in 

1872-1890* 

OFFICIAL  JOURNAL  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 

AGENT'S  OFFICE. 
ST.  PAULS  ISLAND,  ALASKA, 

Saturday,  August  1,  1896. 
Dr.  Jordan  assisted  by  the  natives  drove 
up  three  small  harems  from  Garbotch 
Rookery,  and  upon  investigation  found 
that  there  were  a  number  of  2-year-old 
virgin  cows  among  them. 

1  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  perhaps  ten  or 
twelve  per  cent  of  the  entire  number  of  breeding 
females  were  yearlings  last  season,  and  come  up  onto 
these  breeding  grounds  now  as  virgins,  for  the  first 
time  during  this  season — as  two-year-old  cows. 
They,  of  course,  bear  no  young .  ( Monograph  of  the 
Seal  Islands,  1872-82;  Elliott,  p.  50.  Spl.  Bulletin, 
176:  U.  S.  Fish  Commission,  1882.) 


FUR-SEAL    HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


219 


Lucas  says  that  if  the  seals  are 
not  killed  down  as  young  males 
they  will  grow  up  to  "  destroy  the 
mothers  and  pups." 

The  following  was  contributed  by  Dr. 
Lucas  to  the  New  York  Times  of  Febru- 
ary 23,  1912: 

"THE    FUR    SEAL    HERD. 

"To   the    EDITOR    OF   THE    NEW    YORK 

TIMES: 

"Since  my  name  appears  in  your  editor- 
ial article  on  the  fur  seal  question,  may  I 
have  space  to  state  my  opinions?  My 
attitude  in  regard  to  the  'trampled  pup' 
question  and  the  damage  done  by  unnec- 
essary males  has  been  conservative,  as 
you  will  see  by  the  following  quotations 
from  my  report  of  1898  on  the  'Causes  of 
Mortality  Among  Seals,'  based  on  obser- 
vations of  1896  and  1897: 

"  '  Rough  handling  by  the  males  may  be 
set  down  as  the  most  evident  known  cause 
of  death  among  the  females,  and  the 
greater  the  proportion  of  bulls  the  greater 
the  number  of  deaths,  so  that  in  a  state 
of  nature  the  superabundance  of  bulls 
must  probably  be  an  important  factor, 
if  not  the  chief  factor,  in  checking  the 
increase  of  the  fur  seals.  As  the  propor- 
tion of  the  sexes  at  birth  is  equal,  and  as 
at  least  30  males  are  born  where  one  is 
needed,  there  must  in  olden  times  have 
been  a  prodigious  amount  of  fighting  and 
a  mighty  turmoil  on  the  breeding  grounds, 
with  a  consequent  destruction  of  mothers 
and  pups.  There  were  42  dead  cows  on 
Reef  rookery  in  1897.  and  if  there  was 
such  a  visible  loss  with  only  a  moderate 
surplus  of  males  what  must  have  taken 
place  before  any  males  were  killed  by 
man?  It  is  evident  that  if  many  cows  are 
killed  outright,  many  more  must  be  badly 
injured  and  eventually  die,  an  inference 
made  in  discussing  the  mortality  among 
the  pups,  where  it  was  suggested  that  the 
loss  of  these  injured  females  at  sea  prob- 
ably accounted  for  much  of  the  early 
starvation  of  the  young.1  '  (P.  91.) 

(Hearing  No.  10,  p.  600,  Apr.  20,  1912.) 

The  "science"  of  Dr.  Lucas: 

Mr.  M(  GILLICUDDY.  What  is  your  esti- 
mate as  to  the  required  number  of  males 
to  a  specified  number  of  females? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  May  I  refer  to  my  report? 
I  went  into  the  matter  very  carefully  in 
this.  We  found  that  the  average  number 
of  seals  in  a  harem  in  1896  and  1897  was 
about  35.  That  was  at  a  time  when  the 
number  of  surplus  bulls  was  very  large. 
There  was  a  very  large  number  of  useless 
bulls  who  could  get  no  cows,  who  had  been 
crowded  out.  Thirty-five  was  the  mini- 
mum average  for  a  harem,  and  50  or  60 
would  be  what  might  be  called  a  good 


But  his  associate,  Lembkey,  In 
whom  he  has  " perfect  faith."  de- 
clares that  if  not  so  killed,  they 
••will  increase  a^ain  to  between 
four  and  five  millions." 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  In  1890  conservative 
estimates  placed  the  number  on  the  Prib- 
ilof  Islands  between  four  and  five  millions. 
To-day  there  are  probably  not  over 
180,000  in  the  entire  herd. 

Mr.  WILLIAMS  (of  Mississippi).  At  the 
end  of  18  or  19  years,  if  no  killing  at  all, 
you  think  they  would  go  back  to  between 
four  and  five  millions? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  no  doubt  they 
would.  (Hearing  on  Fur  Seals,  Ways  and 
Means  Committee,  Jan.  25,  1907;  p.  66. 
notes;  M.S.  typed.) 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  *  *  *  So,  that 
shows  that  in  15  years  this  (Robbens  Reef) 
herd  had  rehabilitated  itself,  and  I  sup- 
pose that  if  the  Pribilof  herd  were  left 
alone,  immune  from  land  killing  as  well 
as  sea  killing,  it  would  do  the  same  thing. 
(Hearing  on  Fur  Seals,  Ways  and  Means 
Committee,  Jan.  25,  1907,  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives; p.  62,  notes  M.S.  typed.) 


Its  error  exposed : 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  This  assumption  by  Jordan. 
Lucas,  and  the  rest  of  that ' '  science  "  crowd 
in  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  that  the  breed- 
ing of  that  seal  life  is  precisely  as  so  many 
cattle,  sheep,  or  horses — that  only  a  very 
small  per  cent  of  the  male  life  is  needed, 
is  simply  baseless— the  difference  is  wide, 
and  those  "scientists"  lack  common  sense 
in  not  observing  it. 

Cattle,  sheep,  and  horses  breed  during 
every  month  of  the  year;  fur  seals  breed 
during  only  1  month  of  the  year,  and 
mostly  in  only  10  or  15  days  of  that  month, 
from  July  10  to  20,  annually. 


220 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


working  proportion.  So  long  as  the 
harems  do  not  on  the  average  exceed  this 
there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the 
number  of  bulls  is  too  small.  One  bull  to 
50  or  60  cows  is  not  too  high  an  average, 
but  in  1896  and  1897  there  was  1  bull  on 
the  average  to  every  35  cows.  There  was 
in  one  case  over  100,  but  the  bull  could 
not  hold  them,  and  a  good  many  got  away. 
Some  of  the  harems  also  were  very  small. 
I  checked  that  off  a  little  by  getting  the 
opinion  of  breeders  as  to  what  might  be 
the  relative  number  under  control  of  the 
animals.  One  estimate  is  that  1  ram  is 
sufficient  for  50  ewes  and  that  1  bull  is 
sufficient  for  25  cattle.  When  running  at 
large  1  stallion  is  sufficient  for  20  to  40 
mares,  but  when  under  control  the  num- 
ber may  be  much  larger,  well  on  toward 
100.  And  that  is  in  a  state  of  domestica- 
tion where  polygamy  is  artificial.  Here 
we  have  polygamy  brought  about  by  nat- 
ural conditions  and  where  there  is  no 
danger  of  overestimating  the  number  of 
females  to  males.  (Hearing  No.  12,  p.  709, 
May  16,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C. 
and  L.) 

Lucas  swears  that  he  did  not 
advise  Osborn  to  write  a  foolish 
letter:. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  right?  The  other 
gentleman,  Mr.  Townsend,  does.  Did 
you  inspire  the  letter  which  Henry  Fair- 
field  Osborn,  president  of  the  American 
Museum  of  Natural  History,  wrote  to 
Chairman  William  Sulzer? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  did  not.  Kindly  note, 
Mr.  Elliott  asked  if  I  inspired  that  letter. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  know  any- 
thing about  it? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Only  after  it  was  written. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Were  you  in  consulta- 
tion about  it  with  anyone? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No;  my  advice  was  not 
asked. 


How  long  would  a  herd  of  cattle  hold  its 
numbers  if  all  the  breeding  was  put  into 
only  10  days  of  every  year — from  July  10 
to  20 — and  only  1  bull  living  to  serve  100 
cows?  What  would  1  ram  do  with  100 
ewes?  What  would  a  stallion  do  with  100 
mares?  What,  if  only  half  that  number  to 
serve? 

Why  that  service  would  fail ;  and  at  the 
best,  would  be  feeble  to  impotent  after 
a  short  day  or  two  of  demand.  (H.  W. 
Elliott  to  Secretary  Redfield,  May  4, 
1913,  Dept,  of  Commerce  Bldg.) 


But  Osborn  says  Lucas  gave 
him  the  advice  upon  which  the 
foolish  letter  rests : 

Mr.  ELLIOTT  (reading) : 

"THE  AMERICAN  MUSEUM  OF 

"NATURAL  HISTORY, 
"OFFICE  OF  THE  PRESIDENT, 

"New  York,  January  22.  1912. 
"DEAR  SIR:  As  president  of  the  Amer- 
ican Museum  of  Natural  History,  I  have 
been  securing  the  advice  of  the  expert 
zoologists  of  this  institution,  especially  of 
Dr.  Frederic  A.  Lucas,  who  is  a  trained 
authority  on  the  fur-seal  question.  I  de- 
sire to  protest  against  the  proposed  amend- 
ment to  the  fur-seal  bill  (drafted  by  the 
State  Department),  which  amendment 
provides  a  15-year  closed  season  on  male 
seals.  This  amendment,  should  it  be- 
come law,  would  exterminate  the  great 
seal  herd  of  the  United  States,  and  is 
founded  upon  ignorance  of  the  first  prin- 
ciples of  breeding  under  natural  condi- 
tions and  of  the  artificial  conditions 
which  have  been  brought  about  on  the 
islands  through  prolonged  and  fateful 
pelagic  sealing. 

"I  am,  very  respectfully, 

"HENRY  FAIRFIELD  OSBORN, 

"President. 
"Hon.  WILLIAM  SULZER, 

"  Chairman    House    Committee    on 
Foreign  Affairs,  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives, Washington,  D.  C. 
"  I  am  strongly  in  favor  of  the  bill  itself. ' ' 


FUK-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


221 


Lucas  claims  that  he  first  dis- 
covered the  hookworm  cause  of 
pup's  death. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Isn't  it  true,  Doctor,  that 
it  was  through  C.  W.  Stiles  that  the  hook- 
worm was  discovered? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Didn't  he  first  call  your 
attention  to  that? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No;  I  called  his  attention 
to  it.  (Hearing  No.  12,  p.  720,  May  16, 
1912.) 


Now,  how  did  he  get  the  idea  that  they 
would  be  exterminated  after  he  had  con- 
ferred with  your  scientific  acumen? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Men  may  confer,  you  know, 
and  do  something  entirely  different. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  did  he  get  that  im- 
pression, if  not  from  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  do  not  know.  You  will 
find  all  my  publications  entirely  different 
from  that. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  So  you  will  not  be  re- 
sponsible for  what  Dr.  Osborn  says? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Not  in  this  case:  certainly 
not. 

But,  pinned  down,  he  admits 
that  Stiles  had  told  him  first. 


Dr.  LUCAS.  *  *  *  Mr.  Chairman, 
may  I  makea  statement  right  here? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Yes. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  This  will  be  the  best  an- 
swer I  can  possibly  make.  In  1896,  as  you 
may  remember,  I  stated  we  penned  up  a 
pup  and  allowed  it  to  die:  to  starve  to 
death.  I  took  it  with  me  to  St.  George 
Island  and  let  it  lie  out  there  overnight 
and  dissected  it,  noting  carefully  the  con- 
dition of  the  organs,  so  that  we  could  say 
what  were  the  conditions  of  the  organs 
after  starvation.  In  examining  this  pup 
I  found  two  or  three  small  worms  in  the 
intestines.  Now,  to  find  worms  in  the 
intestines  of  a  young  animal  struck  me 
as  a  very  curious  circumstance,  so  I  pre- 
served them  carefully  and  submitted 
them  to  Dr.  Stiles.  In  1897,  before  I  went 
up  on  the  islands,  Dr.  Stiles  brought  those 
to  me  and  said  that  they  were  Uncinariar 
a  very  dangerous  parasite,  and  under  suit- 
able conditions  it  might  be  the  source  of 
a  great  death  rate  among  the  young  seals. 
Acting  on  the  advice  of  Dr.  Stiles  I  looked 
very  carefully  for  this  worm  and  found  it. 
I  have  a  record  of  the  first  pup  actually 
found  to  have  died  from  Uncinaria. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  So  Dr.  Stiles  really  did 
advise  you  of  the  direct  cause  of  death 
of  these  seals? 

Dr.  LUCAS.   Xo;  he  said  it  was  possible. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  then  you  found  it 
to  be  true? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Yes. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  So  Dr.  Stiles  deserves  the 
credit  for  having  found  it? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  He  deserves  the  credit  for 
having  made  a  prediction  that  came  true. 
^Hearing  No.  12,  p.  721,  May  16,  1912.) 


222 


FUE-SEAL   HERD    OF    ALASKA. 


Lucas  swears  pups  starve  be- 
cause bulls  kill  their  mothers. 


Mr.  McGuiRE.  Now,  Doctor,  you  speak 
of  a  certain  mortality  on  account  of  the 
starving  of  the  young.  This  starvation 
may  be  caused  by  the  loss  of  the  mother 
cow  having  been  killed  by  the  males. 
That  is  one  cause? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Yes.  (Hearing  No.  V2,  p. 
711,  May  16,  1912.) 


Lucas  tries  to  deny  his  "  dis- 
co very"  of  the  "fact"  that  the 
fur  seal  naturally  tramples  its  own 
young  to  death. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  About  how  many 
days? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  About  50  days  in  1896,  al- 
lowing about  9  days'  time  spent  at  sea 
going  to  and  from  one  island  to  another. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  1897  how  many  days 
were  you  on  the  islands? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  About  42  days. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  On  the  Islands? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  That  is  about  the  number. 
I  have  the  exact  data  right  here. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  Dr.  Lucas,  did  you 
see  up  there  a  pup  trampled  to  death  by 
a  bull? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you,  in  1897,  exhibit 
a  series  of  trampled  pups  to  the  biological 
society  here  in  Washington  and  say  that 
11,000  had  been  trampled  to  death  by 
bulls? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  not  address  the 
society  on  January  4,  1897,  on  the  subject 
of  trampled  pups? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Didn't  you  exhibit  a 
series  of  pups  in  alcohol? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Didn't  you  call  attention 
to  the  state  of  these  11,000  pups,  which 
you  stated  on  the  platform  during  the 


Elliott  swears  that  Luca^ 
saw  a  bull  kill  a  cow,  that  Lucas 
fakes  the  statement. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Right  on  that  point,  Mr. 
Chairman,  not  one  of  these  sciein 
Dr.  Jordan,  George  A.  Clark,  Merriam, 
Stejneger,  Lucas,  or  Townsend — have 
published  a  line  in  their  reports  upon  that 
life  in  which  they  describe  the  "fighting 
of  bulls  so  as  to  tear  the  cows  to  pieces  and 
trample  their  pups  io  death."  Nov.", 
their  sole  argument  to-day,  that  they 
brought  over  to  the  Senate,  is  that  if  we 
let  these  yoiinir  seals  grow  up  in  a  closed 
season  they  will  go  to  fighting  and  will 
"tear  the  co\vs  to  pieces  and  trample  the 
pups  to  death."  It  is  a  fake  story;  it  is 
contrary  to  the  natural  law  that  governs 
them;  and  I  am  not  going  to  quietly  sit 
here  and  let  it  even  be  hinted  at  thai  I 
am  an  "enemy"  of  the  fur  seals  because  I 
believe  in  the  natural  laws  of  their  wild 
life  governing  them  being  freed  from  the 
checks  put  upon  them  by  half-baked 
naturalists.  (Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  954, 
955,  July  30,  1912.) 

But  his  memory  is  refreshed, 
and  he  does  recall  it. 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  did  you  talk  about? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Causes  of  mortality  among 
seal  pups. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Didn't  you  say  it  was  due 
to  trampling? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  record  of  your  report 
of  1896  denies  it. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Find  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  preliminary  report 
of  1896 — "Cause  of  destruction  of  pups  is 
chiefly  due  to  trampling  by  males." 
You  signed  that  with  Dr.  Jordan,  didn't 
you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  think  I  did  not  sign  that 
report.  That  report  was  made  by  Dr. 
Jordan. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Would  there  be  a  report 
by  Dr.  Jordan  or  any  other  member  of 
the  board  that  is  not  sent  to  you  to  sign? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Yes.  Dr.  Jordan,  as  head 
of  the  commission,  took  the  combined 
reports  of  the  various  members  of  the 
commission  and  drew  up  the  preliminary 
report. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  are  associated  with 
him  in  that  preliminary  report  of  1896, 
aren't  you?  You  don't  deny  it,  do  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS  Deny  what? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  association  and  quo- 
tation by  Dr.  Jordan  of  you? 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


223 


course  of  your  remarks  had  been  trampled 
to  death? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  did  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  After  you  had  read  your 
paper  on  this  subject  of  trampled  pups, 
didn't  Dr.  Merriam  rise  and  say  he 
agreed  with  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  do  not  recall.  I  do  not 
have  the  minutes  of  that  meeting. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  didn't  Mr.  C.  H. 
Townsend  rise  and  say  that  some  of  the 
things  he  had  missed,  but  he  agreed  with 
you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  recall  the  meeting. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  It  is  coming  back  to  you 
now.  Didn't  Mr.  True — this  was  Janu- 
ary 4.  1897.  at  Cosmos  Hall— didn't  Mr. 
True  arise  and  say  that  he  had  failed  to 
notice  these  trampled  pups? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  do  not  know. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Didn't  Dr.  Stejneger  also 
rise  and  say  that  he  was  considerably 
embarrassed  but  that  he  had  no  reason 
to  doubt  your  discovery  of  trampled  pups? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  Dr.  Stejneger  remarked 
that  he  doubted  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now.  it  is  coming  back  to 
you  that  you  did  address  them  on  the 
subject  of  trampled  pups? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No;  causes  of  mortality 
among  seal  pups. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Is  that  in  answer  to  my 
question? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  It  is.  (Hearing  No.  12, 
p.  719,  May  16,  1912.) 

Lucas,  "scientist."  would  not 
stop  killing,  "for  the  good  of  the 
herd." 

Mr.  M(  GUIRE.  Assuming  that  pelagic 
sealing  has  been  stopped,  would  you  sus- 
pend killing  on  the  islands? 

Dr.  Lii  AS.   X<>.  sir. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  What  would  you  do? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  should  recommend,  as  I 
think  I  have  done  elsewhere,  that  the 
first  year  a  less  number  of  seals  be  taken 
than  has  been  taken,  in  order  to  provide 
sufficient  males  for  the  females  spared  by 
pelagic  sealing.  If  we  killed  12,000  seals 
last  year,  I  would  say,  do  not  kill  but 
10.000  this  year,  to  make  sure  of  having  a 
sufficient  amount.  I  believe  in  taking 
no  chances  and  leaving  no  loophole  for 
criticism.  That  would  be  of  course  a  pre- 
cautionary measure. 

The  cessation  of  killing  on  land  would 
release  an  undue  number  of  males  that 
would  do  no  good,  that  would  simply  dis- 
turb the  rookeries  and  be  a  dead  loss  com- 
mercially. (Hearing  No.  12.  pp.  712.  713. 
May  16,  1912.) 


Dr.  LUCAS.  I  didn't  know  that  he 
quoted  me.  I  haven't  that  document  by 
me.  Have  you  the  document? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  don't  need  it.  You 
don't  deny  its  existence,  do  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  know  there  is  such  a 
report. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  know  there  is  a  re- 
port of  some  46  pages  with  your  name 
associated  with  Dr.  Jordan  as'one  of  the 
distinguished  scientists  who  had  made 
this  close  study  of  the  seals  that  summer. 
Now,  in  1897,  you  discovered  those  pups 
were  not  trampled  to  death,  didn't  you? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  The  greater  part  of  them. 
Yes;  we  revised  our  causes  of  the  previous 
year. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Who  revised  them? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  I  did  most  of  it,  because  I 
was  the  one  on  whom  devolved  this 
report  on  the  causes  of  mortality.  (Hear- 
ing No.  12,  p.  720,  May  16,  1912.) 


Liebes,  lessee,  would  not  stop 
killing,  "for  the  good  of  the 
herd." 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Have  you  any  idea  or 
general  knowledge  of  about  how  many 
seals  there  are  in  the  herd  now? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  No,  sir;  I  have  no  knowl- 
edge. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  business  is  almost 
destroyed,  is  it  not,  Mr.  Liebes? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  Well,  not  necessarily  so. 
If  they  are  allowed  to  recuperate,  they 
will  be  all  right.  They  will  be  able  to 
take  seals  each  year,  and  I  certainly  think 
that  is  the  only  way  to  do.  This  idea  of 
shutting  down  for  a  number  of  years  is  un- 
necessary and  absolute  rot.  *You  have 
got  to  run  your  seal  herd  like  you  would 
run  a  stock  range;  it  has  got  to  be  left  to 
people  who  understand  the  business,  and 
m  the  discretion  of  the  officers  in  charge, 
men  of  ability,  if  you  have  confidence  in 
them,  and  from  what  I  have  seen  of  the 
Department  of  Fisheries  they  certainly 
have  the  ability,  and  the  people  around 
the  islands  certainly  understand  their 
business.  They  are  good,  conscientious 
people.  If  such  people  run  the  thing 
and  take  the  surplus  males  each  year,  it 
will  be  all  right.  It  is  absolutely  essen- 
tial that  it  should  be  run  like  a  stock  farm 
is  run. 


224 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Lucas  says  that  he  did  not  ad- 
vise a  renewal  of  the  lease. 


The  CHAIRMAN.  Would  you  have  con- 
sidered it  would  be  better  to  lease  the 
islands  for  another  20-year  term? 

Dr.  LUCAS.  No,  I  would  not,  Mr.  Chair- 
man. The  part  in  regard  to  re-leasing  it 
I  should  deem  objectionable,  as  you  will 
see  by  the  resolution  adopted  by  the  ad- 
visory board  at  its  meeting. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  wish  that  resolution 
could  be  produced. 

Dr.  LUCAS.  It  is  in  the  record. 

Mr.  PATTON.  In  the  doctor's  evidence 
before  he  said  that  he  believed  it  would 
be  better  for  the  Government  to  have  con- 
trol, and  control  the  killing  there  under 
the  present  system. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  Government  has 
always  had  perfect  control  over  the  killing 
on  those  islands  since  1870. 

Mr.  PATTON.  The  Government  does  the 
killing  itself,  where  it  was  done  by  leasing 
companies  before. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  This  letter  says  they 
don't  want  it  done. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  I  don't  so  understand 
it,  but  the  letter  is  the  best  evidence. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  letter  will  speak 
for  itself.  (Hearing  No.  12,  p.  725,  May 
16,  1912.) 


The  CHAIRMAN.  Do  you  think  male 
seals  should  be  killed  that  are  less  than  2 
years  old? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  I  do  not  think  there  is  any 
rule  about  it  at  all ;  it  is  a  question  of  run- 
ning it  right.  (Hearing  No.  13,  pp.  877, 
878,  June  20,  1912.) 

But  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries 
officially  quotes  him  as  recom- 
mending a  renewal  of  the  lease. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  On  page  157,  hearing  No. 
3,  July  6,  1911,  is  a  letter  from  the  Bureau 
of  Fisheries  dated  December  16,  1909, 
signed  by  Barton  W.  Evermann.  It 
urges  Fish  Commissioner  Bowers  to  send 
agents  to  New  York  and  educate  certain 
people  and  induce  them  to  agree  to  the 
bureau's  idea  of  renewing  the  lease  of  the 
seal  islands  and  preventing  any  cessation 
of  the  killing  thereon.  Now,  in  this  let- 
ter, which  I  will  put  into  the  hearing  to- 
day as  Exhibit  No.  6,  appears  the  follow- 
ing statement : 

DEPARTMENT  OF 
COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 

BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES, 
Washington,  December  16,  1909. 
The  COMMISSIONER: 

The  Washington  Star  of  December  10 
last  announced  that  the  Campfire  Club  of 
New  York  had  inaugurated  a  campaign 
to  save  the  fur-seal  herd  through  legisla- 
tion designed  to  prevent  the  re-leasing  of 
the  sealing  right,  the  cessation  of  killing 
on  the  islands  for  10  years  except  for  na- 
tives' food,  and  to  secure  the  opening  of 
negotiations  with  Great  Britain  to  revise 
the  regulations  of  the  Paris  tribunal .  As 
the  result  of  this  movement,  on  Decem- 
ber 7  three  resolutions  were  introduced  by 
Senator  Dixon,  of  Montana,  one  of  which 
embodies  the  provisions  before  mentioned, 
the  other  two  calling  for  publications  of 
the  fur-seal  correspondence  and  reports 
since  1904. 

As  the  object  of  this  movement  is  at 
variance  with  the  program  of  this  bureau 
and  of  the  recommendations  of  the  ad- 
visory fur-seal  board,  notably  in  the  plan 
to  prevent  killing  and  tl  e  renewal  of  the 
seal  island  lease,  the  advisability  is  sug- 
gested of  having  Messrs.  Townsend,  Lucas, 
and  Stanley-Brown  use  their  influence 
with  such  members  of  the  Campfire  Club 
as  they  may  be  acquainted  with,  with  the 
object  of  correctly  informing  the  club  as 
to  the  exact  present  status  of  the  seal 
question  and  of  securing  its  cooperation  to 
effect  the  adoption  of  the  measures  advo- 
cated by  this  bureau. 

The  attached  letter  is  prepared,  having 
in  view  the  object  stated. 

BARTON  W.  EVERMANN. 

(Hearing  No.  12,  p.  724,  May  16,  1912.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


225 


Lucas  admits  that  he  did  want 
a  new  lease  made  on  the  Russian 
plan. 

Dr.  Ln  A-.  The  cessation  of  killing  on 
land  would  release  an  undue  number  of 
males  that  would  do  no  good,  that  would 
simply  disturb  tin-  rookeries  and  be  a 
dead  loss  commercially.  Government 
control  has  always  seemed  to  us  the  best 
method,  as  it  has  proven  on  the  Russian 
islands,  where  the  Government  has  the 
absolute  power  to  fix  the  number  and 
make  a  dosed  season  at  any  time  it  wishes. 

This  recommendation  was  unanimously 
agreed  to  by  the  advisory  board,  fur-seal 
service  (Dr.  David  Stan-  Jordan,  chair- 
man: Dr.  Leonard  Stejneger,  Dr.  Frederic 
A.  Lucas,  Mr.  Edwin  \V.  Sims,  Dr. 
Charles  H.  Tqwnsend),  the  fur-seal  board 
(Dr.  Barton  Warren  Evermann,  chairman; 
Mr.  Walter  I.  Lembkey,  and  Mr.  Millard 
0.  Marsh),  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries 
(Hon.  George  M.  Bowers),  the  Deputy 
Commissioner  of  Fisheries  (Dr.  Hugh  M. 
Smith),  assistant  fur-seal  agent  (H.  D. 
Chichester),  and  special  scientific  expert 
(Mr.  George  A.  Clark).  (Hearing  No.  12, 
p.  713,  May  16,  1912.) 


But  Elliott  shows  the  com- 
mittee that  such  a  1/ase  adds  to 
gain  of  lessees  at  public  cost  and 
loss. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  will  not  be  neces- 
sary: I  will  just  pass  on.  The  terms  of 
ihis  lease,  which  he  proposed,  increased 
the  profits  of  the  lessee  and  added  to  the 
f  the  Government. 

The  lessee-  are  relieved  of  the  present 
cost  to  them  of  a  great  many  things — 
schools,  doctors —their  entire  plant  is 
purchased:  they  pay  no  more  taxes;  all 
costs  are  taken 'from'  them;  and  yet  they 
are  to  get  all  of  the  skins  taken  for  the 
same  cost  that  they  did  in  the  old  lease. 

Dr.  EVERMAXX.  That  is  not  correct. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  lease  will  speak 
for  itself. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  lease  speaks  to  that 
effect,  because  there  has  never  been  an 
hour  since  the  islands  have  been  leased 
that  the  Government  has  not  had  absolute 
control  over  the  lessees  and  the  killing. 
All  this  twaddle  about  the  "Government 
getting  control  of  the  killing"  is  mere 
dust  and  verbiage;  there  has  never  been 
an  hour  since  the  first  lease  was  made  in 
1870  when  an  officer  of  the  Government 
up  there  has  not  had  the  power  to  stop  the 
killing  down  to  a  single  seal,  and  hold  it 
there — what  more  power  could  you  have 
under  any  "new  lease."  or  any  such  con- 
dition? I  exercised  that  power  in  1890, 
and  no  man  dare  dispute  it  and  does  not 
dispute  it  to  this  day. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  \Vhy  can  it  not  be 
disputed? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Because  no  man  has  set 
aside  my  findings  of  fact  that  summer; 
they  were  stopped;  and  nobody  since  has 
attempted  to  interfere  with  it,  and  no 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  has  ever  said  I 
did  wrong.  Over  at  Paris,  in  1893,  our 
agents  said  to  the  tribunal  that  my  action 
in  1890  was  a  good  thing,  and  they  pa- 
raded there  with  great  satisfaction  the 
fact  that  our  Government  had  stopped 
this  slaughter  on  the  islands  to  save  that 
life,  and  they  wanted  Great  Britain  to 
intervene  to  stop  it  in  the  sea  on  their  side. 
(Hearing  No.  14,  p.  993,  July  29,  1912.) 


21588—13 15 


226 


FUK-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


VI. 

The  sworn  statements  of  W.  I.  Lembkey,  chief  special  agent,  in  charge  of  the  seal  islands 
of  Alaska,  who  is  one  of  the  experts  cited  to  the  United  States  Senate  Committee  on 
Conservation  of  National  Resources,  January  14,  1911,  and  to  the  House  Committee 
on  Expenditures  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  July  9,  1911,  by  Secretary 
Charles  Nagel  as  his  authority  for  killing  seals  in  violation  of  law  and  regulations, 
to  wit: 

Mr.  CABLE.  Give  the  names  of  the  members  of  the  advisory  board. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  The  members  of  the  fur-seal  board  and  of  the  advisory  board,  fur- 
seal  service,  are  as  follows: 

FUR-SEAL  BOARD, 

BUREAU  OF  FISHERIES. 

In  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  general  matters  regarding  the  fur  seals  are  considered  by 
a  fur-seal  board,  consisting  of  the  following: 

Dr.  Barton  Warren  Evermann  (chairman),  who  is  chief  of  the  Alaska  Fisheries 
Service  and  who  has  been  in  Alaska  a  number  of  times.  He  was  a  member  of  the 
fur-seal  commission  of  1892,  when  he  spent  six  months  in  the  North  Pacific  and  Ber- 
ing Sea  and  on  the  seal  islands  studying  the  fur  seal. 

Mr.  Walter  I.  Lembkey,  who  has  been  in  immediate  charge  of  the  seal  islands  for 
many  years;  appointed  March  22,  1899.  (Hearing  No.  2,  p.  109,  June  9,  1911.) 

THE    DEADLY    PARALLEL. 


Lembkey  swears  that  he  does 
not  kill  yearling  seals. 


COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES 
IN  THE  DEPARTMENT  OP 

COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 
HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 
Washington ,  Thursday,  February  29, 1912. 

The  committee  met  at  11  o'clock  a.  m., 
Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman) 
presiding. 

TESTIMONY  OF  WALTER  I.  LEMBKEY,  AGENT 
ALASKA  SEAL  FISHERIES,  BUREAU  OF 
FISHERIES,  DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE 
AND  LABOR. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Our  killing  is  confined 
to  2  and  3  year  old  males  exclusively. 
The  seals  which  they  desire  to  kill  are 
dispatched  at  once  by  means  of  a  blow 
on  the  top  of  the  head  with  a  heavy  club, 
and  the  seal  struck  is  rendered  uncon- 
cious  immediately,  if  not  killed  out- 
right. (Hearing  No.  9,  p.  360,  Feb.  29, 
1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and 
Labor.) 


But  Clark,  special  investigat- 
ing expert,  reports  that  yearlings 
are  killed — uno  seal  too  small" 
for  killing. 

July  23. — Attended  the  killing  at 
Northeast  Point  and  looked  over  the 
rookeries  again  after  the  drive.  There 
are  5  harems  to-day  on  the  west  side  of 
Sea  Lion  Neck,  where  only  3  were  found 
on  the  14th. 

A  killing  was  made  at  Halfway  Point  as 
usual  on  the  return  trip.  It  yielded  32 
skins.  Fifteen  animals — young  bulls — 
too  large  for  killing  and  9  shaved  heads 
were  exempted,  but  no  small  seals  what- 
ever. As  the  end  of  the  killing  season 
approaches  it  is  plain  that  no  seal  is 
really  too  small  to  be  killed .  Skins  of  less 
than  5  pounds  weight  are  taken  and  also 
skins  of  8  and  9  pounds.  These  latter 
are  plainly  animals  which  escaped  the 
killing  of  last  year  because  their  heads 
were  shaved.  Otherwise  it  does  not  seem 
clear  how  they  did  escape. 

July  31.— This  is  the  last  day  of  sealing, 
and  preparations  are  being  made  to  drive 
every  rookery.  The  killing  from  Reef 
and  Gorbatch  yields  660  skins.  This 
represents  76  per  cent  of  the  animals 
driven.  One  hundred  and  ten  seals  are 
obtained  from  Lukanin  and  Kitovi.  No 
small  seals  are  rejected  in  this  drive;  21 
small  ones  are  left  from  the  Reef  drive. 
Nineteen  skins  are  obtained  at  Halfway 
Point.  The  drive  at  Northeast  Point 
gives  330  skins;  15  small  ones  only  are 
exempted.  Zapadni,  redriven  to-day, 
gives  41  additional  skins  taken.  Three 
small  ones  are  released.  At  the  drive 
yesterday  from  this  rookery  39  small 


FUE-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


227 


Lembkey  swears  that  he  does 
not  kill  yearling-  seals. 

COMMITTEE  ON  EXPENDITURES 
IN  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF 

COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 
HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 
Washington,  Thursday,  February  £.9, 1912. 

The  committee  met  at  11  o'clock  a.  m., 
Hon.  John  H.  Rothermel  (chairman)  pre- 
siding. 

TESTIMONY  OF  WALTER  I.  LEMBKEY,  AGENT 
ALASKA  SEAL  FISHERIES,  BUREAU  OF 
FISHERIES,  DEPARTMENT  OF  COMMERCE 
AND  LABOR. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Our  killing  is  confined 
to  2  and  3  year  old  males  exclusively. 
The  seals  which  they  desire  to  kill  are  dis- 
patched at  once  by  means  of  a  blow  on  the 
top  of  the  head  with  a  heavy  club,  and  the 
seal  struck  is  rendered  unconscious  im- 
mediately, if  not  killed  outright.  (Hear- 
ing No.  9,  p.  360,  Feb.  29,  1912.) 


animals  were  released.  Most  of  these  are 
probably  included  in  the  killing  to-day. 
Gorbatch  is  driven  a  second  time  to-day 
and  62  skins  taken. 

This  is  certainly  whirlwind  sealing  and 
an  effective  clean-up  of  the  hauling 
grounds.  If  the  Alaska  Commercial  Co. 
cleaned  up  the  hauling  grounds  without 
reference  to  the  new  lessees  in  the  season 
of  1889,  the  North  American  Commercial 
Co.  has  in  like  manner  cleaned  up  the 
hauling  grounds  without  reference  to  the 
lessees  of  next  year. 

The  total  of  to-day's  killing  on  St.  Paul 
is  1,222  skins.  (Report  G.  A.  Clark  to 
Secretary  Nagel,  Sept.  30,  1909,  pp.  887, 
888,  892,  893;  Appendix  A,  June  24,  1911. 
H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

But  Special  Agent  Clark  reports 
that  Lembkey  has  killed  and  kills 
yearling  seals. 

The  yearlings  of  both  sexes  for  the  sea- 
son must  number  about  12,000  each. 

This  question  of  the  proportion  of  the 
sexes  surviving  to  killable  and  breeding 
age  is  a  fundamertil  one.  It  could  be 
settled  in  a  very  few  seasons  by  such  regu- 
lation of  killing  for  the  quota  as  would 
limit  it  to  animals  of  3  years  of  age  and 
over,  leaving  the  2-year-olds  untouched. 
The  quota  would  then  fall  where  it  be- 
longs, on  the  3-year-olds,  and  give  a  close 
approximation  of  the  survivals  among  the 
young  males,  which  in  turn  could  be  ap- 
plied to  the  young  females.  This  was  the 
method  used  in  1896-97,  when  a  mini- 
mum of  6  pounds  in  weight  of  skins  pre- 
vailed. During  the  present  season  and 
for  some  seasons  past  a  minimum  of  5 
pounds  has  been  in  force,  the  skins  taken 
ranging  in  weight  all  the  way  from  4  to  14^ 
pounds,  bringing  all  classes  of  animals 
from  yearlings  to  4-year-olds  into  the 
quota.' 

The  result  of  this  manner  of  killing  is 
that  we  have  no  clear  idea  from  the  quota 
of  the  number  of  younger  animals  belong- 
ing to  the  herd.  From  the  irregularity  of 
the  movements  of  the  yearlings  of  both 
sexes  and  the  2-year-old  cows,  they  can 
not  be  counted  or  otherwise  accurately 
estimated  on  the  rookeries. 

GEORGE  ARCHIBALD  CLARK, 
Assistant  in  Charge  of 
Fur-Seal  Investigation. 

STANFORD  UNIVERSITY, 

September  30,  1909. 

(Appendix  A.  pp.  850,  851,  June  24, 
1911.) 


228 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Lembkey  swears  that  every 
step  is  taken  to  guard  the  female 
seals  from  killing. 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Females  on  land  art- 
protected  by  every  effort  of  human  inge- 
nuity that  can  be  devised  compatible 
with  the  taking  of  the  skins  of  the  surplus 
young  males,  and  the  committee  can  be 
assured  first  that  the  number  killed  in 
the  past  is  negligible  and  that  none  ever 
have  been  or  will  be  killed  deliberately. 

In  treating  of  the  subject  of  the  killing 
of  females,  I  have  suppressed  no  fact  thai 
would  aid  the  committee  in  forming  its 
conclusions  regarding  the  number  of  I  li<--«- 
animals  killed.  After  hearing  this  evi- 
dence I  am  sure  that  the  committee  will 
conclude  that,  in  regard  to  the  accidental 
killing  of  an  occasional  female,  in  spite 
of  the  greatest  care  exercised,  no  charge 
of  malfeasance  will  lie.  When  we  con- 
sider the  fact,  also,  that  thousands  of  these 
females  were  killed  annually  by  pelagic- 
sealers  in  the  sea,  it  can  be  seen  that  the 
accidental  and  unavoidable  killing  on 
land  of  a  half  dozen  females  annually 
could  have,  to  say  the  least,  no  bearing 

rn  the  future  of  the  herd.     (Hearing 
9,  p.  381,  Mar.  1,  1912,  H.  Com.  Ex. 
Dept.  Com.  and  L.) 


Lembkey  compelled  to  admit 
that  he  does  not  know  whether 
female  skins  are  taken,  or  not;  no 
penalty  for  killing  them  inflicted. 

Mr.  ML-LEAN.  After  the  skins  are  re- 
moved, can  you  distinguish  between  a 
male  and  female  2-year-old? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes,  sir;  at  once.  Oh, 
I  beg  pardon— 2-year-olds? 

Q.  After  the  skin  is  removed  from  the 
animal?  A.  If  you  would  look  at  the 
carcass  of  a  2-year  old  you  could  not  dis- 
tinguish it  readily,  but  the  man  skinning 
the  seal  recognizes  il  i  ho  moment  he  takes 
it  into  liis  hand  1o  skin  it.  Of  course  he 
examines  the  organs  and  matters  of  that 
kind. 

Q.  But  the  animal  is  then  dead? — A. 
The  animal  is  (hen  dead. 

Q.  What  I  asked  you  was  this  -after 
(he  skin  is  removed  from  the  animal,  by 
the  inspection  of  the  skin  itself  could  you 
distinguish  bet  \veeu  a  male  or  a  female 
2-year  old.  A.  You  could  by  looking  at 
the  teals  of  the  animal. 

Q.  And  are  they  developed  on  a  2-year- 
old  female? — A.  I  don't  know  that  they 
are.  You  could  find  them  there  possibly. 
I  don't  know  whether  they  are  developed 
or  not;  I  never  examined  a  skin  to  find  out. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  How  positive  can  you 
be,  then,  Mr.  Lembkey,  that  no  females 
are  killed? 

Mr.  LKMBKEY.  The  reason  upon  which 
I  base  that  positive  statement  that  no 
females  are  killed  is  this:  Stringent  orders 
are  given  to  all  the  skinners  to  report  at 
once  any  female  knocked  down  in  the 
drives.  They  are  ordered  to  report  it  to 
the  agent  in  charge  of  the  killing  and  in 
charge  of  the  men. 

Mr.  MCLEAN.  Is  there  a  penalty  then 
inflicted  upon  the  killer  for  killing  the 
female  and  when  he  reports  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  No;  because  the  killing 
gang  consists  of  six  persons,  we  will  say, 
and  it  is  impossible  to  tell  which  one  of 
those  six  knocked  down  the  seal;  but  if  a 
female  should  be  knocked  down  by  acci- 
dent an  admonition  is  given  to  the  club- 
bers. 

Q.  So  that  it  is  quite  possible? — A. 
They  are  jacked  up. 

Q.  It  is  quite,  possible  if  a  female  was 
killed  through  inadvertence  that  the 
native  might  not  report  it? — A.  No;  be- 
cause the  man  who  reports  the  presence 
of  the  female  would  not  in  the  least  be 
culpable,  because  he  is  a  skinner,  having 
nothing  to  do  with  the  killing. 

Q.  He  i1^  probably  a  relative? — A.  I 
should  not  say  that.  There  is  no  great 
penalty  attached  to  the  killing  of  a  female, 
such  as  to  lead  the  men  to  suppress  the 
fart  of  its  presence.  (Dixon  Hearing, 
U.  S.  Senate  Com.  Cons.  Nat.  Resources, 
pp.  15,  16,  Feb.  4,  1911.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


229 


Under  cross  -  examination, 
Lembkey  admits  that  a  yearling 
sealskin  of  his  own  identification 
and  measuronuMit  is  36^  inches 
long. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Briefly,  Mr.  Elliott  has 
accused  those  charged  with  the  manage- 
ment of  the  seal  fisheries  with  malfeasance 
in  office  in  that — 

1.  They  have  allowed  the  killing  of 
thousands  of  yearling  seals. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  coming  to  that.  I 
want  to  get  it  distinctly  in  the  record  that 
this  man  knew  exactly  what  he  was  doing 
all  along. 

It  became  necessary,  then,  for  the  com- 
mittee to  get  from  Mr.  Lembkey  his  own 
identification  and  measurement  of  a 
yearling  seal  and  its  skin.  To  this  'end 
he  was  examined,  and  he  testified  as  fol- 
lows— you  will  see  the  point,  because  he 
has  testified  that  he  did  not  kill  anything 
"under  2  years  old,"  because  the  regula- 
tions forbid  it.  He  testified  as  follows,  on 
page  442,  Hearing  No.  9: 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey,  do  you 
know  the  length  of  a  yearling  seal  from  its 
nose  to  the  tip  of  its  tail? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Xo,  sir;  not  offhand. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  never  measured 
one? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Oh,  yes;  I  have  meas- 
ured one. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  no  record  of 
it? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  a  record  of  it 
here. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  What  is  its  length? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  length  of  a  year- 
ling seal  on  the  animal  would  be  from  the 
tip  of  the  nose  to  the  root  of  the  tail,  39£ 
inches  in  one  instance  and  39£  in  another 
instance 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  And  41  in  another  in- 
stance.    I  measured  only  three.'' 
*  *  *  * 

Also  en  page  443 : 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  much  can  you  .say 
is  left  on  a  yearling  after  you  have  taken 
the  skin  off? 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  How  much  skin  is 
left  after  you  have  taken  it  off? 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes,  sir;  after  they  re- 
move it  for  commercial  purposes  a  certain 
amount  is  left  on. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  stated  about  3  inches. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  that  would  leave  a 
yearling  skin  to  be  35  inches  long. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Xo;if  it  was  39£  inches 
long,  it  would  leave  it  36£  inches.  That 
is,  all  the  animal  from  the  tip  of  the  nose 
to  the  root  of  the  tail  would  be  39£  inches 
long.  Three  inches  off  that  would  leave 
36^  inches." 


Lembkey  then  admits  that  an 
accurate  measurement  of  the 
12,920  skins  he  took  in  1910,  de- 
clare the  fact  that  7,733  of  them 
are  only  34  inches  long 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey  having 
thus  identified  "7,733"  of  his  12,920  skins 
as  "small  pups"  and  "extra  small  pups," 
the  committee  then  examined  him  as  to 
the  lengths  of  those  "small  pup"  and 
"extra  small  pup  "  skins;  he  then  testified 
as  follows,  page  441,  Hearing  No.  9  : 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  getting  at  the 
analysis  of  your  catch  w^hich  you  have 
given  here  already.  You  have  given  in 
a  statement  here  that  8,000  of  them  were 
"small"  and  "extra  small." 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  7,700. 

•'Mr.  ELLIOTT.  7,700? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  7,733  were  small  and 
extra  small  pups. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Fraser  tells  us  that 
those  seals,  none  of  them  measured  more 
than  34  inches  nor  less  than  30  inches. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  committee  can 
see  what  Mr.  Fraser  states.  Mr.  Fraser 
states  that  small  pups  measured  33J 
inches  in  length." 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  would  that  indi- 
cate as  to  age? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  coming  to  that  — 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  From  there  [indicating] 
to  there  [indicating]  on  that  diagram  -  • 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  33|  inches  in  length, 
and  extra  small  pups  measured  30  inches 
in  length. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  you  have  some 
extra  small  pups  there  which  makes  it 
8,000? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Only  11  of  those. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  It  does  not  amount  to 
anything. 

"Mr.    LEMBKEY. 


300 


It  just  makes  your 
more  than  the  actual 


8,000  about 
number. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  the  reason  I 
used  those  round  numbers.  It  does  not 
amount  to  anything  one  way  or  the  other. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  actual  number  is 
300  short  of  8,000,  Mr.  Elliott." 

Mr.  Lembkey  thus  testifies  that  his  own 
summary  and  official  record  of  the  meas- 
urements of  "7,733  fur  sealskins,"  which 
he  took  during  the  season  of  1910  on  the 
Pribilof  Islands,  declares  the  fact  that  no 
one  of  them  exceeds  in  length  34  inches. 
That  fact  determines  them  —  all  of  them  — 
to  have  been  the  skins  taken  from  yearling 
seals.  (Hearing  No.  14,  pp.  903,  904,  905, 
July  25,  1912.) 


230 


FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 


In  this  distinct  affirmation  and  state- 
ment, Mr.  Lembkey  tells  the  committee 
that  a  "yearling"  fur-seal  skin  of  his  own 
identification  and  measurement  is  36£ 
inches  long.  It  then  became,  in  order  to 
understand  what  the  lengths  of  those 
12,920  fur-seal  skins  were,  which  he  took 
during  the  season  of  1910  on  the  Pribilof 
Islands,  and  then  certified  them  into  the 
record  of  his  work  as  being — all  of  them — 
' '  taken  from  male  seals  not  under  2  years 
of  age."  (See  testimony  Apr.  13,  1912, 
pp.  428,  429,  Hearing  No.  9.) 

Lembkey  declares  that  he  can 
not  distinguish  the  sex  of  year- 
ling seals;  that  he  does  not  kill 
them. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Ho\v  many  did  you 
kill  last  year? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  We  killed  12,920. 

Q.  How  many  had  the  old  fur  company 
killed  the  year  before?— A.They  killed 
]4,000  and  something. 

Q.  What  was  the  youngest  seal  you 
killed;  what  age? — A.  Two  years  old. 

Q.  The  statement  has  been  made  that  it 
is  hardly  possible  to  distinguish  the  male 
and  the  female  at  that  age? — A.  At  2  years 
old? 

Q.  Yes;  what  is  your  opinion? — A. 
There  is  considerable  difficulty  in  distin- 
guishing the  young  males  and  females 
There  is  considerable  difficulty  in  distin- 
guishing the  male  and  the  female  year- 
ling. They  are  both  of  the  same  size  and 
general  formation.  It  is  almost  impossi- 
ble for  anybody  not  an  expert  to  pir-k 
them  out  and  distinguish  between  them, 
and  it  is  rather  difficult,  even  for  an  ox- 
pert;  but  of  the  2-year-olds  the  females  are 
not  on  the  hauling  grounds;  they  are  on 
the  breeding  rookeries  for  their  initial 
impregnation.  The  2-year-old  males,  on 
the  other  hand,  are  on  the  hauling  out 
grounds. 

Q.  In  the  killing  last  year,  did  you  kill 
any  female  seals?— A.  Not  to  my  knowl- 
edge, sir.  I  had  general  supervision,  as  I 
say,  over  the  Avork  on  both  islands,  but, 
being  back  and  forth-  from  day  to  day,  I 
was  not  present  at  every  killing  and  could 
not,  of  course,  be;  but  I  carefully  inter- 
rogated this  morning  Mr.  Judge,  who  had 
charge  of  the  killing  on  St.  Paul,  and  Maj. 
Clark,  who  had  charge  on  St.  George,  as  to 
whether  any  female  seals  had  been  killed 
during  the  past  season,  to  their  knowl- 
edge, and  they  stated  that  none  had  been 
killed.  (Dixon  hearing,  Feb.  4,  1911.  p. 
10,  II.  S.  Senate  Com.  on  Conservation 
Nat.  Resources.) 


But  Lembkey  is  compelled  to 
admit  that  he  took  7,733  yearling 
skins  in  1910. 


Mr.  Lembkey  having  thus  identified 
"7,733"  of  his  12,920  skins  as  "small 
pups"  and  "extra  small  pups,"  the  com- 
mittee then  examined  him  as  to  the 
lengths  of  those  "small  pup"  and  "extra 
small  pup"  skins;  he  then  testified  as 
follows,  page  441,  Hearing  No.  9: 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  getting  at  the 
analysis  of  your  catch  which  you  have 
given  here  already.  You  have  given  in  a 
statement  here  that  8,000  of  them  were 
\-mall'  and  'extra  small.' 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  7,700. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  7,700? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  7,733  were  small  and 
extra  small  pups. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Fraser  tells  us  that 
those  seals,  none  of  them  measured  more 
than  34  inches  nor  less  than  30  inches. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  committee  can 
see  what  Mr.  Fraser  states.  Mr.  Fraser 
states  that  small  pups  measured  33f 
inches  in  length." 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  would  that  indi- 
cate as  to  age? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  am  coming  to  that — 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT. From  there  [indicating] 
to  there  [indicating]  on  that  diagram — 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  33f  inches  in  length, 
and  extra  small  pups  measured  30  inches 
in  length. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Then  you  have  some 
extra  small  pups  there  which  makes  it 
8,000? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Only  11  of  those. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  It  does  not  amount  to 
anything. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  It  just  makes  your 
8,000  about  300  more  than  the  actual 
number. 

"Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  the  reason  I 
used  those  round  numbers.  It  does  not 
amount  to  anything  one  way  or  the  other. 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  actual  number  is 
300  short  of  8,000,  Mr.  Elliott." 

Mr.  Lombkey  thus  testifies  that  his  own 
summary  and  official  record  of  the  meas- 
urements of  "7,733  fur  sealskins,"  which 
he  took  during  the  season  of  1910  on  the 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


231 


Lembkey  swears  that  he  had 
'''reliable  data"  upon  which  the 
regulations  were  lowered  to  "5 
pounds"  minimum  skin  weight 
from  a  oj-pound  limit. 

Mr.  LKMBKEY.  We  have  found  on  the 
island.-?  that  the  most  reliable  way  of  gaug- 
iii'-T  sealskins  so  as  to  classify  them  into 
different  ages  is  that  of  weight,  of  weigh- 
ing the  skins.  We  have  very  reliable  data 
showing  that  2-year-olds  seldom  if  ever 
wei<_rh  less  than  5  pounds,  and  we  also  have 
data  which  give  us  the  information  that 
the  skins  of  3-year-olds  weigh  from  6£  to 
8£  pounds.  Upon  that  basis  we  have  es- 
tablished our  regulations.  (Hearing  No. 
9,  p.  398,  Mar.  1, 1912;  H.Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
Com.  and  Labor.) 


Lembkey  says  that 
he  has  published  a  table  of  skin 
weights. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  As  much  official  as  your 
work.  Have  you  published  any  table  of 
weights  or  measurements? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  know,  Mr. 
Elliott.  Have  I? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you?  I  am  asking 
you. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  He  has  said  he  does 
not  remember. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  perhaps  have  in  one 
of  my  reports. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  remember  the 
exact  date.  I  am  not  evading  the  point. 
I  simply  can  not  remember  the  exact  date. 
Perhaps  you  have  that  data. 

The  CHAIRMAX.  Did  you  publish  a  re- 
port? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  think  in  one  of  my  re- 
ports— I  think  it  was  in  1907,  I  am  not  cer- 
tain which  year — appeared  a  statement  of 
the  classification  of  the  skins  in  London 
for  that  year,  with  an  approximation  of 
the  ages  of  the  animals.  I  think  it  was  in 
1907.  That  is  what  you  had  in  your  mind, 
is  it  not? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  not  a  table  show- 
ing  

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  That  is  the  only  table. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Therefore  you  have  never 
published  any  table? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  If  you  wish  to  draw  that 
conclusion 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  have  been  up  there 
all  these  years,  and  now,  to-day,  you  can 


Pribilof  Island-.  d«-!:>iv-  th<-  fact  that  no 
one  of  then  in  length  34  inches. 

That  fact  determines  them — :\11  of  them — 
to  have  been  th«-  skin-  taken  from  yearling 
iring  N<>.  14,  p.  905,  July 
25,  1912.  li.  <om.  Exp.  Dept,  Com.  and 
Labor.) 

But,  under  cross-examination, 
Lembkey  admits  he  had  no  "reli- 
able data"  as  warrant  for  chang- 
ing the  5£  limit  to  5  pounds — only 
his  "opinion," 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  1906  is  when  we  re- 
duced the  weight  from  5£  pounds  to  5 
pounds.  Please  get  that  correct. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  But  in  1904  you  made 
that  recommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  To  Mr.  Hitchcock. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  any  table  of 
weight  measurement  of  your  own  making 
which  warranted  you  in  making  that  rec- 
ommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  had  not.  I  expressed 
that  as  my  opinion.  (Hearing  No.  9,  p. 
450,  Apr.  13,  1912;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
Corn,  and  Labor.) 

But,  on  examination,  he  ad- 
mits that  he  never  has  prepared 
such  a  table. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  What  do  you  mean, 
that  the  weight  of  a  2-year-old  is  5 
pounds? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No;  I  say  you  say  "from 
5  to  6^  pounds." 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes;  but  you  have  got 
to  give  us — 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  what  I  stated — 5 
to  6£  pounds. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  That  is  the  answer  to 
your  question.  That  is  fair.  You  ought 
not  to  assume  to  know  more  about  it  than 
he  does. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  No;  I  can  not  find  his 
statement  about  it  before.  I  wanted  to 
get  it  into  the  record. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  his  answer  to  your 
question? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes;  that  is  there.  You 
have  no  official  record  of  the  weights  of  a 
3-year-old  skin,  have  you?  You  have 
never  published  any? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes;  I  published  the 
weights  of  a  2-year-old  and  3-year-old 
skin.  I  made  the  statement  in  my  re- 
ports to  the  effect — 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  said  it  was  an  ap- 
proximation. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  made  a  state- 
ment in  my  reports  giving  an  approxima- 
tion of  the  weights  of  skins  from  seals  of 
different  ages.  Now  that  I  recollect,  it 
was  not  in  the  form  of  a  table.  I  have 
stated  repeatedly  in  the  text  of  my  re- 
ports that  a  2-year-old  would  weigh  from 


232 


FUR-SEAL    HERD    OF    ALASKA. 


not  tell  from  any  official  records  of  yours 
what  the  weight  of  a  2-year-old  skin  is? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  What? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  can  not  tell  from  any 
official  records  of  yours  what  the  weight  of 
a  2-year-old  skin  is.  You  say  it  is  5 
pounds.  Where  is  the  official  record'.' 
(Hearing  No.  9.  p.  4;3<i.  Apr.  1:5.  1912.) 


Lemhkey  swears  lliat  the  data 
upon  which  he  orders  and  directs 
tne  killing  is  "very  reliable." 

Mr.  LI:MI;KKV.  We  have  found  on  the 
islands  that  the  most  reliable  way  of 
gauging  sealskins  so  as  to  classify  them 
into  different  ages  is  that  of  weight,  of 
weighing  tin-  skins.  \Ye  have  very  re- 
liable data  showing  that  2-year-olds  sel- 
dom if  ever  wei<rh  less  than  o  pounds,  and 
we  also  have  data  which  give  us  the  in- 
formation that  the  skins  of  :>-year-olds 
weigh  from  (iV  to  84  pounds.  I'pon  that 
basis  we  have  established  our  regulations. 
Now  it  is  absolutely  impossible  for  us  to 
proceed  to  any  classification  with  regard 
to  age  by  means  of  measurements  on  the 
islands  for  the  reason  that  the  green  skin 
is  very  pliable  and  flexible,  and  by  a  little 
pressure  could  be  made  a  foot  or  a  foot 
and  a  half  longer  than  it  really  is.  or  wider. 
in  whichever  direction  you  wish  to  apply 
the  pressure,  so  that  on  the  islands  the 
only  standard  we  can  fix  is  the  standard 
of  weight,  i  riearinir  No.  !»,  p.  :;<>s.  Mar.  1 , 
1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and 
Labor. ) 


5  to  6-i-  pounds.  (Hearing  No.  9,  p.  437, 
Apr.  13,  1912.) 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  1906  is  when  we  re- 
duced the  weight  from  5^  pounds  to  5 
pounds.  Please  get  that  correct. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  But  in  1904  you  made 
that  recommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  To  Mr.  Hitchcock. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  any  table  of 
weight  measurement  of  your  own  making 
which  warranted  you  in  making  that  rec- 
ommendation? 

Mr.  LEMB^KEY.  I  had  not.  I  expressed 
that  as  my  opinion.  (Hearing  No.  9,  p. 
450,  Apr.  13,  1912.) 

But  he  officially  reports  in  1907 
that  he  has  nothing  hut  an  "ap- 
proximate" idea  of  the  size  and 
weights  of  the  skins. 

Mr.  LKMHKKY.  The  average  weight  of 
these  si/es  has  been  determined  by  Lamp- 
son  &  Co..  as  well  as  by  the  agentfl  on  the 
islands.  (See  S.  Doc.  No.  :>s,  r,!)th  Cong.. 
1st  .-csx..  ]>.  SS;  also  proceedings  Vur-Seal 
Arbitration,  vol.  8,  pp.  !)!»;  et  B&q.  U 
certain  of  the  sixes  of  skins  do  not  occur 
at  all  in  the  islands  catch,  the  weights  as 
given  by  Lampson  it  Co.  are  here  used, 
although  they  do  not  (  orrespond  in  every 
respect  with  our  idea  of  the  average 
weights  of  seals  of  a  given  age.  Opposite 
t  hose  weights  I  have  placed  the  age  of  the 
animals  from  \vhich  they  were  taken, 
based  on  my  judgment  after  having  as- 
sisted in  weighing  thousands  of  skins: 


Weight. 

Age. 

I  -arge  wigs  

Lb*.    Oz. 

34       1) 

Yean 

Small  wigs                                    * 

•>3       0 

Middlings  

It       11 

<; 

Middlings  and  smalls  
Smalls  

11      3 

'.t        s 

5 

4 

Lai'tit1  pups  
Middling  pups  

s       _' 

t;    !•> 

}      :i 

Small  pups  
Extra  small  mips 

o    ID 
1    11 

}      * 

Kxtra  oxl  ra  small  pups  
<  "Jrav  pups  

:5     13 
*      0 

1 

0) 

1  Four  to  five  months. 

The  ages  of  seals  of  a  given  weight 
marked  in  the  above  table  are  based  on 
an  average  and  are  necessarily  only  ap- 
proximate. They  are  stated  here  solely 
for  the  purpose  in  hand  and  not  as  an 
effort  on  my  part  to  fix  the  correct  weight 
of  the  skins  of  seals  of  a  certain  age.  As 
it  is.  however,  it  is  close  enough  to  con- 
struct an  estimate  such  as  we  desire. 
(Appendix  A.  p.  498,  June  11.  1911,  H. 
Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 
(Kept,  of  \V.  I.  Lembkey.  Sept.  9.  1907, 
to  Sec.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


233 


^wears  it  is  impo--i- 
ble  to  measure  a  "green"  sealskin. 

Mr.  MADDEX.  Would  not  a  stn-iched 
skin  show  thai  it  had  be. -a  stretched? 

Mr.  LEMHKKY.    .\.»;  the  green  skin,  a-  a 
matter  of  fact,  is  us  pliable  a>  a  j. 
India  rubber,  and  in  throwing  it  down  on 
the   ground    it    may   curl    up   or  .stretch 
i wise;    ii  i-  .-<>  elusive  in  form  it  i.s 
-ihle  f.>r  us  to  measure  ii;     that  is 
the  truth  of  the  m:i' 

Mr.  Mr(  TiLLicrDDY.  You  say  ni'-a.-ure- 
ment  would  not  be  reliable  becaus"  ii 
might  be  stretched.  Suppose  you  did  not 
stretch  it.  suppose  you  take  it  honestly, 
then  would  it  be.  if  honestly  taken,  would 
it  be  a  test? 

Mr.  LEMHKKV.  I  tried  to  make  that 
clear  to  the  committee. 

The  CHAIRMAN-.  That  is  a  direct  <| mo- 
tion. Why  do  you  not  answer  it? 

Mr.  LEMHKEY.  I  am  attempting  to.  It 
is  impossible;  of  course,  all  our  actions  up 
there  are  honestly 

Mr.  MADDEN  (interposing).  Answer  the 
on  right  straight.     Do  not  try  to  ex- 
plain it. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  1  have  attempted  to 
'  hat  in  measuring  a  green  skin  it  is 
impossible  to  find  out  its  exact  length 
when  you  lay  it  on  the  ground,  because  it 
may  curl  up.  or  roll,  or  stretch,  and  it  ean 
only  be  measured  atV-r  it  has  become 
hardened  by  salt. 

Mr.    M(  GILLICUDDY.  Then  it   will  not 
h? 

Mr.  LEMHKEY.  Certainly  not. 

Mr.  McGiLLicuDDY.  That  is  the  proper 
time  to  mea-ure  it.  after  it  has  become 
rigid  and  stiff? 

Mr.  LEMHKEY.  Certainly.  (Hearing 
No.  '>.  p.  399.  Mar.  1,  1912.) 


But  when  under  cross-examina- 
tion he  denies  the  statement. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lnubkey,  you  stated 
to  the  committee  that  it  was  impossible  to 
measure  a  yearling  skin,  and  therefore 
you  have  never  done  it . 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  remember  that. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.   Did  you  not  say  that? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  1  stated  that'it  was  not 
impossible  to  measure  a  green  skin.  I 
said  that  I  have  never  done  it. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  not  seen  your  tes- 
timony. Of  course.  I  ean  not  take  you 
up  on  "it.  9 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  You  know  you  have 
seen  my  testimony,  because  I  have  seen 
your  notations  in 'the  report. of  the  com- 
mittee's hearings. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Never  mind  about 
that.  Ask  the  question. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  have  not  read  your  tes- 
timony: I  only  remember  what  you  said. 
(Hearing  No.  9.  p.  439,  Apr.  13,  1912.) 


234 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


Lembkey  swears  thai  ho  saved 
the  3-y<>ar-olds  from  killing  as 
food  seals  by  a  64-pound  maxi- 
mum skin  weight  limit,  hut- 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Notwithstanding  re- 
peated allegations  to  the  contrary,  the 
regulations  of  the  department  fully  pro- 
tect the  breeding  herd,  and  these  regula- 
tions are  carefully  and  thoroughly  ob- 
served. They  require  that  no  female  or 
marked  male  should  be  killed,  and  no 
male  seal  having  a  pelt  weighing  less  than 
5  or  more  than  8$  pounds.  During  the 
food  killing  season  of  the  fall  and  spring 
seals  having  skins  weighing  ovei  B| 
pounds  or  under  5  pounds  may  not  be 
taken, this  extra  limitation  being*enforced 
to  prevent  the  killing  of  those  males 
marked  for  breeding  purposes  after  the 
new  hair  has  grown  in  and  obliterated  the 
mark  which  is  placed  upon  their  hiaes  at 
the  beginning  of  the  season. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  Right  there,  let  me  ask  a 
question. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  I  do  not  think  it  will  in- 
terfere. You  said  that  seals  2  or  3  years 
of  age  were  killed? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes,  sir.  . 

Mr.  MADDEN.  And  that  no  skin  weighed 
less  than  5  or  more  than  8  pounds? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  More  than  8£  pounds. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  Except  during  a  certain 
period  of  the  season  when  the  higher 
weight  was  reduced  to  6$  pounds? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  MADDEN.  What  becomes  of  the 
seals  more  than  3  years  of  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  are  allowed  to  ma- 
ture as  breeders.  (Hearing  No.  9,  p.  363; 
Feb.  29,  1912.) 


But,  it  seems  that  that  6J- 
pound  maximum  was  ad  ually  in- 
creased to  8J  pounds.  So  these 
" saved"  3-year-olds  in  June  and 
July  were  all  killed  in  the  October- 


November 

seals." 


following     as     "food 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Let  me  interrupt  you  a 
moment.  The  instructions  for  '1904, 
known  as  the  Hitchcock  rules,  used  this 
language:  "  No  seal  shall  be  taken  that  is 
over  4  years  of  age."  That,  of  course, 
was  intended  to  mean  that  no  4-year-olds 
were  to  be  killed,  but  the  company  took  it 
to  mean  that  a  seal  was  not  over  4  years 
until  it  was  at  least  5  years  of  age,  and 
that  they  could  at  least  kill  4-year-olds. 
That  was  the  controversy. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Right  there,  Mr.  Lemb- 
key,  did  you  prohibit  their  killing  them? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  did. 

Mr.  McGuiRE.  Over  4  years  of  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  did. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  In  ]  904? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Yes. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  you  do  it  in  1905? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.   Yea. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  How  did  you  do  it?  You 
had  no  brand  on  them. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  By  fixing  a  limit  of 
8^  pounds  on  the  skins  to  be  taken. 
(Hearing  No.  9,  p.  458:  Apr.  13,  1912.) 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  wish  to  call  particu- 
lar attention  to  these  paragraphs  of  the  in- 
structions regarding  reservations  to  be 
made: 

[Instruction  issued  Mar.  9,  19D6.J 

SEC.  8.  Size^  of  Jcillable  seals. — No  seals 
shall  be  killed  having  skins  weighing  less 
than  5  pounds  nor  more  than  8$  pounds. 
Skins  weighing  more  than  8£  pounds  shall 
not  be  shipped  from  the  islands,  but  shall 
be  held  there  subject  to  such  instructions 
as  may  be  furnished  you  hereafter  by  the 
department.  Skins  weighing  less  than  5 
pounds  shall  not  be  snipped  from  the 
islands  unless,  in  your  judgment,  the 
number  thereof  is  so  small  as  to  justify  the 
belief  that  they  have  been  taken  only 
through  unavoidable  accident,  mistake, 
or  error  in  judgment. 

SEC.  10.  Seals  for  food. — The  number  of 
seals  to  be  killed  by  the  natives  for  food 
for  the  fiscal  year  beginning  July  1,  1906, 
shall  not  exceed  1,700- on  the  island  of  St. 
Paul  and  500  on  the  island  of  St.  George, 
subject  to  the  same  limitations  and  re- 
strictions as  apply  to  the  killing  of  seals 
by  the  company  for  the  quota.  Care 
should  be  taken  that  no  branded  seals  be 
killed  in  the  drives  for  food.  (Hearing 
No.  10,  pp.  483,  484;  Apr.  19,  1912.) 


FUR-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 


235 


The  lessees  suborn  Lembkey  and  Bureau  of  Fisheries  and  then 
secure  all  of  the  " reserved"  or  (i spared"  seals,  in  violation  of  the 
sworn  statements  made  by  the  latter. 


THE    DEADLY    PARALLEL. 


Lembkey  declares  that  it  is 
mvossary  to  put  a  6^-pound 
limit  on  food  skins  to  save  the 
"reserved"  3-year-olds  from  kill- 
ing, and  tells"  the  Senate  Com- 
mittee that  it  is  done. 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now,  Mr.  Chairman,  in 
the  matter  of  the  nullification  of  the 
Hitchcock  rules,  with  this  evidence  duly 
considered  by  your  committee,  of  the 
illegal  killing  of  those  yearlirg  seals  in 
1910  (and  that  evidence  of  this  guile  ap- 
plies to  every  season's  work  on  the  Pribi- 
lof  Islands  ever  since  1890  down  to  May 
1,  1910),  I  desire  to  present  the  following 
testimony,  which  declares  that  ever  since 
May  1,  1904,  when  the  "Hitchcock rules" 
were  first  ordered  by  the  Department  of 
Commerce  and  Labor,  those  rules  have 
been  systematically  and  flagrantly  vio- 
lated i»y  the  agents  of  this  department 
who  were  specially  sworn  to  obey  and 
enforce  them. 

On  February  4,  1911,  Chief  Special 
Agent  Lembkey  was  introduced  by  Sec- 
retary Charles  Nagel  to  the  United  States 
Senate  Committee  on  Conservation  of 
National  Resources,  and  during  his  ex- 
amination by  that  committee  he  made 
the  following  statement,  to  wit,  on  page 
14  (hearings  on  Senate  bill  9959,  February 
4,  1911,  Committee  on  Conservation  of 
National  Resources): 

"Dr.  HORNADAY.  How  many  'short 
2-year-olds '  were  killed  last  year? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  understand 
your  term.  No  seals  under  2  years  old,  to 
my  knowledge,  were  killed. 

"Dr.  HORNADAY.  What  would  be  the 
age  of  the  smallest  yearlings  taken? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Two-year-olds  rarely, 
if  any.  I  may  state  here,  Dr.  Hornaday, 
that  "a  great  difference  of  opinion  exists 
between  Mr.  Elliott  and  the  remaining 
people  who  understand  this  situation. 
There  is  a  great  gulf  between  their  opin- 
ions, and  it  can  never  be  reconciled  on 
the  question  of  the  weights  of  skins  of 
2-year-olds. 

"Prof.  ELLIOTT.  I  will  present  my  in- 
formation in  a  moment. 

"  Dr.  HORNADAY.  The  minimum  weight 
is  what? 

"Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Five  pounds.  Dur- 
ing food  drives  made  by  the  natives, 


But  the  official  instructions 
which  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries 
order,  declare  that  that  limit  of 
6J  pounds  has  been  raised  to  8^ 
pounds,  and  so  all  of  the  " re- 
served" 3-year-olds  in  June  and 
July  annually,  are  killed  in  Octo- 
ber and  November,  following. 

DR.  EVERMANN    *    *    * 

"[Instructions  issued  Mar.  9, 1906.] 

' '  SEC.  8.  Sizes  of  tillable  seals. — No  seals 
shall  be  killed  having  skins  weighing 
less  than  5  pounds  nor  more  than  8£ 
pounds.  Skins  weighing  more  than  8| 
pounds  shall  not  be  shipped  from  the 
islands,  but  shall  be  held  there  subject 
to  such  instructions  as  may  be  furnished 
you  hereafter  by  the  department.  Skins 
weighing  less  than  5  pounds  shall  not  be 
shipped  from  the  islands  unless,  in  your 
judgment,  the  number  thereof  is  so  small 
as  to  justify  the  belief  that  they  have  been 
taken  only  through  unavoidable  accident, 
mistake,  or  error  in  judgment. 

"SEC.  10.  Seals  for  food.— The  number 
of  seals  to  be  killed  by  the  natives  for 
food  for  the  fiscal  year  beginning  July  1, 
1906,  shall  not  exceed  1,700  on  the  island 
of  St.  Paul  and  500  on  the  island  of  St. 
George,  subject  to  the  same  limitations 
and  restrictions  as  apply  to  the  killing  of 
seals  by  the  company  for  the  quota. 
Care  should  be  taken  that  no  branded 
seals  be  killed  in  the  drives  for  food. 

"[Instructions  issued  Apr.  15, 1907.] 
"Identical  with  instructions  of  1906. 

"[Instruction  issued  Apr.  1, 1908.] 
"Identical  with  instructions  of  1907, 

"[Instructions  issued  Mar.  27, 1909.] 

"SEC.  10.  Seals  for  food.— Identical 
with  instructions  for  1906,  1907,  and  1908, 
except  in  addition  is  added  'The  maxi- 
mum weight  for  food  skins  shall  not  ex~ 
ceed  7  pounds. 

"[Instructions  issued  May  9, 1910.] 

"SEC.  11.  Seals  for  food.— No  tVinal.- 
seal  or  seal  having  a  skin  weighing  under 
5  pounds  or  more  than  7  pounds  shall  be 
killed  during  the  .so-culled  food-killing 
season. 


236 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


when  the  .s.-iils  killed  arc  limited  to  (jf, 
pounds,  in  order  to  exclude  all  these  3- 
yoar-olos  branded  during  the  .summer, 
you  understand  the  natives  do  kill  down 
a  little  more  closely  than  our  regulations 
allow,  for  the  reason  that  they  need  the 
meat,  and  since  they  have  to  exclude  all 
these  fine,  fat  seals  over  6^  pounds  they 
go  for  the  little  ullows  a  little  more 
closely. 

"The  CHAIRMAN.  How  many  seals  wer6 
kill-  (I  last  year  i'or  food  by  the  native.-/.' 

••Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  limit  was  2.r>oo. 
Speaking  offhand,  I  think  about  2, MOO 
Were  killed. 

"Q.  Were  any  females  killed?  A.  Xo, 
sir;  not  to  my  knowledge,  and,  as  1  staled. 
I  carefully  interrogated  these  two  gentle- 
men who  had  charge  of  this  killing,  and 
they  stated  thai  to  their  knowledge  no 
female  was  killed. 

"Q.  What  class  of  males  were  killed  In- 
die natives  for  food?  A.  I'mlcr  (U 
pounds."  (Hearing  Xo.  14,  p.  907,  July 
•25,  i!M2,  11.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  C.  &!...' 

Lembkey  swears  that  he  re- 
serves from  slaughter  1,000 
3-year-old  seals  every  year,  be- 
fore any  killing  begins  for  the 
season  in  June. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Before  any  killing  was 
done  this  summer,  as  has  been  the  prac- 
tice for  some  years  past  following  the 
bureau's  instructions,  1,000  of  the 
choicest  3-year-olds  appearing  in  the  first 
drives  of  the  season  were  reserved  for 
future  breeders  and  marked  by  shearing 
their  heads,  so  as  to  render  their  subse- 
quent recognition  during  the  season  an 
easy  matter.  These  seals,  thus  marked, 
were  immune  from  clubbing  and  were  not 
killed.  These  3-year-old  seals  the  follow- 
ing year  became  4-year-olds,  the  killing 
of  which  class  in  general  is  prohibited. 
Only  after  the  1,000  3-year-olds,  known 
as  the  breeding  reserve,  is  secured  and 
marked  does  the  killing  of  seals  for  skins 
begin.  The  killing  is  confined  only  to 
the  2  and  3  year  old  immature  males  not 
required  for  purposes  of  reproduction. 
To  obtain  these,  the  breeding  rookeries 
are  not  disturbed,  but  the  bachelors' 
hauling  grounds  on  either  island  were 
driven  every  fifth  or  sixth  day  if  seals 
were  found  thereon  in  sufficient  numbers 
to  justify  driving.  The  killing  season 
begins  on  July  1  and  ends  July  31,  but 
one  drive  is  always  made  subsequently 
on  August  10  to  furnish  the  natives  with 
fresh  meat  during  a  portion  of  the  so- 
called  "stagey"  season  (when  the  seals 
shed  their  hair),  which  begins  August  10 
and  ends  October  20,  and  during  which 
no  killing  is  done.  (Hearing  No.  9.  pp. 


"[Instructions  issued  Mar.  31,  1911.] 
'•Identical  with  instructions  of  1910." 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  We  have  found  on  the 
island  that  the  most  reliable  way  of  gaug- 
ing seal  skins  so  as  to  classify  them  into 
different  a.Lr^  s  is  that  of  weight — of  weigh- 
ing the  skins.  \\'e  have  very  reliable 
dala  showing  that  2-year-olds  seldom  if 
ever  weigh  less  than  5  pounds,  and  we  also 
have  data  which  give  us  the  information 
that  the  skins  of  3-year-olds  weigh  from 
(>!  to  8$  pounds.  Upon  that  basis  we 
have  established  our  regulations.  (Hear- 
ing Xo.  9,  p.  398:  Hearing  Xo.  10,  pp 

186,   Apr.    !<).    1912.    If.   Com.    E: 
Dept;  C.  &L.} 


But  Clark  reports  that  these 
reserved  seals  in  June  are  all  sub- 
sequently killed,  and  tells  how 
they  are  so  taken. 


3.  The  reserve  of  bachelors. — Beginning 
with  the  season  of  1904,  there  has  been  set 
aside  each  spring  a  special  breeding  re- 
serve of  2,000  ydung  males  of  2  and  3  years 
of  age.  These  animals  have  been  marked 
by  clipping  the  head  with  sharp  shears, 
giving  them  a  whitish  mark  readily  dis- 
tinguishing them  to  the  clubbers.  They 
are  carefully  exempted  on  the  killing 
field  and  released. 

This  method  of  creating  a  breeding 
reserve  seems  open  to  considerable  criti- 
cism, and  has  apparently  been  only 
moderately  successful.  The  mark  put 
upon  the  animal  is  a  temporary  one.  The 
fur  is  replaced  during  the  fall  and  winter, 
and  the  following  spring  the  marked  seals 
can  not  be  recognized.  The  animals 
being  2  and  3  years  of  age  are  still  killable 
the  next  season,  the  2-year-olds  in  fact 
the  second  season.  A  new  lot  of  2,000  is 
clipped  the  next  season,  and  these  are 
carefully  exempted,  but,  except  in  so  far 
as  animals  of  the  previous  season's  mark- 
ing are  reclipped,  they  have  no  protection 
the  second  season,  and  without  doubt  are 
killed. 

If  such  is  not  the  case,  it  is  difficult  to 
understand  what  becomes  of  them.  The 
annual  reservation  from  1904  to  1907,  both 
seasons  included,  would  aggregate  8,000 
animals.  These  animals  would  be  of  ages 
ranging  from  8  to  5  years  this  season.  The 
only  animals  present  in  1909  which  could 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


237 


362,  363,  Feb.  29,  1912,  Ho.  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 
Dr.  HORNADAY.  The  minimum  weight 

is  what? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Five  pounds.  During 
food  drives  made  by  the  natives,  when 
the  .--nils  killed  are  limited  to  6*  pounds, 
in  order  to  exclude  all  these  3-year-olds 
branded  during  the  summer,  you  under- 
stand the  natives  do  kill  down  a  little 
more  closely  than  our  regulations  allow, 
for  the  reason  that  they  need  the  meat, 
and  since  they  have  to  exclude  all  these 
fine,  fat  seals  over  6$  pounds  they  go  for 
the  little  fellows  a  little  more  closely. 
(Dixon  Hearing,  U.  S.  Sen.  Com.  Cons. 
Xat.  Res..  Feb.  4,  1911,  pp.  14,  15. 

The  seal  contractor  swears  that 
the  "good  conscientious"  Bureau 
of  Fisheries'  agents  should  have 
full  swing  and  control  on  the  is- 
lands. 

The  CHAIRMAN-.  I  mean,  in  the  present 
depleted  condition  of  the  herd,  if  there 
should  be  a  short  closed  season,  so  that 
the  seals  can  multiply  and  then  do  what 
you  say.  Would  that  be  good  policy,  in 
your  judgment? 

Mr.  LIEBES.  Well,  I  said,  leave  it  to  the 
people  on  the  islands;  if  they  find  they 
can  not  take  any,  let  them  not  take  any; 
there  should  be  no  compulsion  to  take 
any;  but  if  the  people  on  the  islands  may 
take  any,  then  take  the  surplus. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  But  you  see  you  as- 
sume that  the  people  on  the  islands  will 
do  the  right  thing,  and  I  do  not  mean  to 
insinuate  they  would  do  anything  but 
what  is  right;  'however,  I  am  trying  to  get 
your  real  opinion  of  the  thing  in  the 
record . 

Mr.  LIEBES.  As  you  stated,  there  might 
be  some  danger  in  leaving  it  to  the  officers 
on  the  islands,  but  I  do  not  think  the  dan- 
ger would  be  as  great  as  instructions  given 
from  Washington  in  the  best  of  faith, 
because  they  might  meet  other  conditions 
when  they  arrive  there.  I  think  the 
lesser  evil",  if  there  are  any  evils,  is  to 
allow  the  ofiicer  in  charge  to  determine. 

The  CHAIRMAN- .  A  great  deal,  of  course, 
must  be  intrusted  to  the  people  in  charge. 

Mr.  LIEBES.  Well,  not  necessarily  so. 
If  they  are  allowed  to  recuperate,  they 
will  be  all  right.  They  will  be  able  to 
take  seals  each  year,  and  I  certainly  think 
that  is  the  only  way  to  do.  This  idea  of 
shutting  down  for  a  number  of  years  is 
unnecessary  and  absolute  rot.  You  have 
got  to  run  your  seal  herd  like  you  would 
run  a  stock  range;  it  has  got  to  be  left  to 
people  who  understand  the  business,  and 
in  the  discretion  of  the  officers  in  charge, 
men  of  ability,  if  you  have  confidence  in 
them,  and  from  what  I  have  seen  of  the 


have  resulted  from  this  reservation  were 
the  513  idle  and  half  bulls.  Even  if  we 
assume  that  they  have  in  the  meantime 
replaced  the  entire  stock  of  breeding  bulls 
this  would  account  for  only  1,900  of  them, 
and  the  active  bulls  were  for  the  most 
part  of  a  distinctly  older  class.  (Kept. 
<;.  A.  ('lark  to  Sec.  Nagel,  Sept.  30, 
1909.  p.  847?  Appendix  A,  June  24,  1911. 
II.  <  om.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


But  when  they  get  up  there, 
Liebes  asks  that  they  give  him 
full  swing,  and  they  do. 


ST.  PAULS  ISLAND,  ALASKA. 

[Journal  of  the  chief  special  agent  in  charge  of  Seal 
Islands. 

Thursday,  June  9, 1892.— Mr.  J.  Stanley. 
Brown  arrived  and  took  the  place  of  Maj. 
Williams  as  United  States  agent  in 
charge  of  the  Seal  Islands  (p.  2). 

Friday,  July  8,  1892. — The  entire  con- 
trol and  management  of  the  killing 
grounds  and  killing  of  the  seals  were  given 
to  Mr.  Fowler,  of  the  N.  A.  C.  Co.,  by 
order  of  Mr.  J.  Stanley-Brown,  agent  in 
charge,  and  Assistant  Agent  Murray  was 
ordered  to  count  the  seals. 


The  killing  is  entirely  directed  by  the 
agent  of  the  lessees  who  directs  the  grade 
of  seal  to  be  taken.  (Report  of  Chief  Spl. 
Agt.  J.  B.  Crowley.  Nov.  1,  1896.) 

This  season  (1909)  they  (the  drives) 
have  been  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the 
lessees  *  *  *  the  lessees  have  been 
free  to  take  what  they  could  get.  (Re- 
port of  G.  A.  Clark,  Sept.  30,  1909,  to  Sec. 
Nagel,  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor,  pp. 
829-866,  Appendix  A,  June  24,  1911, 
H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


238 


FUE-SEAL  HERD  OF  ALASKA. 


Department  of  Fisheries  they  certainly 
have  the  ability,  and  the  people  around 
the  islands  certainly  understand  their 
business.  They  are  good  conscientious 
people.  If  such  people  run  the  thing  and 
take  the  surplus  males  each  year,  it  will 
be  all  right.  (Hearing  No.  13,  pp.  877- 
879,  June  20,  1912,  Ho.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
Com.  and  Labor.) 

Hitchcock,  learning  that  the 
lessees  and  Lembkey  were  trying 
to  get  a  modification  of  his  5£- 
pound  minimum  limit  to  5  pounds, 
had  the  following  peremptory  in- 
struction added  to  the  orders  of 
May  1,  1905: 

DEPARTMENT  OF 
COMMERCE  AND  LABOR, 
OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY. 

Washington,  May  1,  1905. 
Mr.  W.  I.  LEMBKEY, 

Agent  in  Charge  of  Seal  Islands,  De- 
partment of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
St.  Paul  Island,  Pribilof  Group, 
Alaska. 

SIR:  With  reference  to  the  provision  in 
your  instructions  prohibiting  the  lessees 
from  killing  any  seals  during  the  coming 
season  that  are  under  2  years  of  age,  you 
are  directed  in  the  enforcement  of  this 
requirement  to  fix  upon  the  same  mini- 
mum limit  of  weight  for  the  skins  to  be 
taken  as  that  prescribed  for  the  season  of 

1904,  namely.  54-  pounds. 

It  will  be  your  duty  to  see  that  every 
possible  precaution  is  exercised  to  prevent 
the  killing  of  seals  that  yield  skins  under 
the  weight  mentioned. 
Respectfully, 

V.  H.  METCALF, 

Secretary. 

(Appendix  A,  p.  153,  June  24,  1911. 
H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

Lembkey  officially  declares,  in 

1905,  that  no  change  should  be 
made  in  the  Hitchcock  rules — it 
"would  be  wholly  unwise." 


PRESENT    REGULATIONS    SHOULD    BE    CON- 
TINUED. 

Since  it  appears  that  a  scarcity  of  bulls 
is  threatened  on  the  islands,  and,  in  fact, 
has  occurred  actually  on  several  of  the 
rookery  spaces  on  St.  Paul,  any  change  in 
the  present  regulations  looking  to  a  lessen- 
ing of  the  restrictions  placed  on  killing  on 
the  islands  would  be  wholly  unwise. 

The  result  of  these  regulation;  can  not 
be  felt  before  1907,  as  has  in  effect  been 


Lembkey  acknowledges  this 
peremptory  mandate,  but  he  does 
not  enter  it  on  his  official  journal 
of  the  Government  house,  St. 
Paul  Island. 


OFFICE  OF  AGENT  IN 

CHARGE  SEAL  ISLANDS, 
St.  Paul  Island,  Alaska,  June  17, 1905. 
The  honorable  the  SECRETARY  OF 

COMMERCE  AND  LABOR. 
SIR:  I  have  the  honor  to  acknowledge 
the  receipt  of  the  department's  letter  of 
the  1st  ultimo,  prescribing,  for  the  season 
of  1905,  a  minimum  weight  of  sealskins  to 
be  taken  of  5?V  pounds,  and  to  say  that  the 
necessary  measures  will  be  taken  to  have 
the  regulations  properly  observed  on  the 
islands. 

A  copy  of  the  letter  referred  to  has  been 
forwarded  to  the  assistant  agent  in  charge 
of  St.  George  Island,  for  his  guidance. 
Respectfully, 

W.  I.  LEMBKEY, 
Agent  in  Charge  Seal  Islands. 

(Appendix  A,  p.  153,  June  24,  1911,  H. 
Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


But  when  Hitchcock  is  out  of 
the  department,  then  Lembkey, 
without  warrant,  does  unite  with 
the  lessees  and  secures  a  change 
for  the  worse  in  them. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  Mr.  Hitchcock  left 
the  department  who  succeeded  him? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  As  chief  clerk?  I  think 
Mr.  Bowen  did. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Bowen.  Did  you 
again  renew  your  recommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  remember  that 
I  recommended  that  the  weight  be  re- 
duced to  5  pounds  in  1905,  Mr.  Elliott. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  order  of  reduction 
was  made  in  1906? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  In  1906. 


FUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


239 


»iatr<l.  Durirg  the  interval  which  must 
elapM-  before  that  time  a  steady  decreafle 
in  hulls  will  !>.-  encountered.  The  closest 
killing  on  land  occurred  during  the  sea- 
i  15102  and  1903.  In  the  latter  sea- 
eon  the  lessees  released  from  the  drives  on 
St.  Paul  only  983  small  seals.  This  prac- 
tical annihilation  of  bachelors  for  this  year 
will  he  fell  on  the  rookeries  four 
MT.  or  in  1907. 

are  obliged  to  face  in  190(>  and 
xtra  heavy  decrease  occurring 
from  the  closer  killing  in  1902  and  1903, 
no  reduction  in  the  number  of  bachelors 
now  saved  on  the  islands  should  be  made 
until  the  rookeries  themselves  show  an 
influx  of  male  life  sufficient  to  more  than 
offset  th?  yearly  mortality.  (Report 
W.  I.  Lembkey,  <>ct.  26.  1905,  to  Sec'y 
Com.  and  Labor;  Appendix  A,  p.  175,  H. 
Coin.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor,  June 
24.  1911.) 


Lembkey 's  assistant,  Judge,  de- 
clares that  the  seal  question  was 
completely  mastered  and  under- 
stood by  Hitchcock  when  those 
" regulations"  were  prepared. 

[The  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  retrans- 
fer  of  trie  Alaskan  seal  service  to  the  Bureau  of 
Fisheries,  by  James  Judge,  assistant  agent,  Seal 
Islands.] 

*  *        •  *  * 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  Hon.  Frank 
H.  Hitchcock,  when  connected  with  the 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  had 
charge  under  the  Secretary  of  the  sealing 
business:  that  he  made  an  exhaustive 
examination  of  all  the  questions  affecting 
al  life;  that,  as  before  stated  herein, 
he  prepared  the  regulations  under  which 
the  business  is  now  conducted. 

*  #  *  * 
Mr.  Hitchcock'fl  knowledge  of  the  seal 

life  was  so  perfect  and  his  mastery  of  the 
seal  question  was  so  complete  that  the 
President  remitted  the  subject  to  his 
supervision  and  control  even  after  he 
became  First  Assistant  Postmaster  Gen- 
eral. It  is  earnestly  recommended  that 
if  the  reasons  assigned  in  the  foregoing 
statements  are  not  deemed  sufficient  that 
Mr.  Hitchcock's  knowledge  of  the  subject 
be  availed  of. 
Respectfully  submitted. 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Who  was  the  chief  clerk 
then? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  1  presume  Mr.  Bowen 
was. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  you  again  made  the 
recommendation? 

Mr.  I.KMKKKY.  Not  to  Mr.  Bowen;  no. 
The  recommendation  was  made,  I  think, 
to  the  S<M-r«'ta;y.  bin  it  was  made  through 
Mr.  Sims,  the  solicitor  of  the  department, 
who  then  had  charge  of  the  seal  business. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Oh,  he  took  charge  of  it? 
Had  you  in  1904  any  table  of  length, 
weight,  and  measurement  of  fur  seals  to 
contradict  the  official  tables  that  declared 
a  fur  seal  2  years  of  age.  the  skin  of  which 
weighed  5^  pounds?  Had  you  any  rec- 
ords to  show  Mr.  Bowen  or  Mr.  Hitch- 
cock? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  190(>  is  when  we  re- 
duced the  weight  from  5£  pounds  to  5 
pounds.  Please  get  that  correct. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  But  in  1904  you  made 
that  recommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  To  Mr.  Hitchcock. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  any  table 
weight  measurement  of  your  own  making 
which  warranted  you  in  making  that  rec- 
ommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  had  not.  I  expressed 
that  as  mv  opinion.  (Hearing  No.  9,  pp. 
449-450,  Apr.  13,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

But  Lembkey  just  changed 
them  as  best  in  his  " opinion" — 
with  no  wan-ant  for  that  opinion 
either.  [The  seal  contractor's 
"opinion,"  too.] 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey.  when  you 
made  that  statement  in  1901,  you  went  to 
Mr.  Hitchcock  and  recommended  a  5- 
pound  limit.  What  did  he  tell  you  in 
1904? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  remember  just 
what  he  did  tell  me.  Mr.  Elliott, 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Did  he  not  tell  you  that 
you  were  taking  yearling  skins? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Xo,  sir;  he  told  me  that 
you  had  made  the  charge  that  we  were 
taking  yearling  skins. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Was  he  not  impressed 
with  the  fact  that  you  were  taking  year- 
ling skins? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Xo;  hewasnot. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yet  he  fixed  the  limit 
5£  pounds? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  He  did  it  solely  as  I 
have  stated — to  place  the  limit  so  high 
that  you  nor  any  other  man  could  make  any 
objection  to  the  policy  of  the  department. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That* was  very  correct  on 
his  part,  was  it  not? 

*  *  #  * 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  When  Mr.  Hitchcock  left 
the  department  who  succeeded  him? 


240 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


DECEMBER,  1008.  (Appendix  A,  p. 
666,  June  24,  1911.  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept, 
Com.  and  Labor.) 

The  company's  protest  regarding  the 
department's  decision  to  fix  the  minimum 
weight  of  skins  at  5£  pounds  was  brought 
to  our  attention  here  at  Washington  before 
the  sailing  of  the  steamer  and  was  filed  for 
future  reference.  (F.  H.  Hitchcock  to 
W.  I.  Lembkey,  May  28, 1904.  Appendix 
A,  p.  47,  June  24,  1911,  TI.  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


Lembkey  says  in  his  official 
report,  1906,  that  he  made  that 
change  in  the  Hitchcock  Rules 
because  li  the  department  found, " 
etc.,  "of  the  fact/'  etc. 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  reduction  in  1906 
of  the  limit  of  weight  on  small  skins  from 
5J  to  5  pounds  was  made  by  the  depart- 
ment because  of  the  fact  that  the  latter 
weight  more  nearly  represented  the  divid- 
ing line  between  1  and  2  year  old  seals. 
The  young  males  between  5  and  5i  pounds 
undoubtedly  are  2-year-olds,  and  the  5$- 
pound  prohibition  resulted  in  arbitrarily 
turning  away  from  the  killng  fields  sev- 
eral thousands  of  small  2-year-olds  that 
otherwise  would  be  killed  for  quota. 

This  reduction  of  the  limit  in  weight 
resulted  in  the  dismissal  in  1906  of  3,980 
small  seals,  as  against  5,548  in  1905. 
These  3,980  dismissals  in  1906  are  shown 
elsewhere  to  represent  approximately 
3,300  animals. 

In  my  opinion,  this  closer  killing  among 
the  smaller  2-year-olds  is  advisable. 
Present  safeguards  against  too  close  killing 
are  ample.  With  their  strict  enforce- 
ment, it  is  the  part  of  wisdom  to  allow  the 
lessee  to  take  all  remaining  young  males 
not  covered  by  prohibitory  regulation, 
as  in  so  doing  it  reduces  to  a  minimum  a 
class  of  seals  upon  which  the  pelagic 
sealers  prey  during  the  summer,  and 
which,  if  saved,  would  offer  no  further 
benefit  to  the  herd  than  that  now  assured 
under  the  regulations  governing  the  kill- 
ing on  land.  (Kept.,  Dec.  14,  1906,  to 
Secretary  Com.  and  Labor,  W.  I.  Lemb- 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  As  chief  clerk?  I  think 
Mr.  Bo  wen  did. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Bowen.  Did  you 
again  renew  your  recommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  do  not  remember  that 
1  recommended  that  the  weight  be  re- 
duced TO  f>  pounds  in  1905.  Mr.  Elliott. 

Mr  ELLIOTT.  That  order  of  reduction 
was  made  in  1906? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  In  1906. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Who  was  the  chief  clerk 
then? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  presume  Mr.  Bowen 
was. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  must  have  had  some- 
thing to  present  to  Mr.  Hitchcock  and  to 
Mr.  Bowen  as  your  reason  for  reducing 
that  weight  from  5^  pounds  to  5  pounds. 
What  was  it? 

Mr.  LKMBKEY.  I  had  not.  I  experssed 
that  as  my  opinion.  ('Hearing  No.  9,  pp. 
449,  450,  Apr.  13,  1912.  II.  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

But  Lembkey,  under  cross- 
examination,  admits  that  the 
change  was  made  on  his  recom- 
mendation, and  that  he  himself, 
had  no  warrant  for  making  it — 
only  his  "opinion." 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  order  of  reduction 
was  made  in  1906? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  In  1906. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Who  was  the  chief  clerk 
then? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  presume  Mr.  Bowen 
was. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  And  you  again  made  the 
recommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Not  to  Mr.  Bowen;  no. 
The  recommendation  was  made,  I  think, 
to  the  Secretary,  but  it  was  made  through 
Mr.  Sims,  the  solicitor  of  the  department, 
who  then  had  charge  of  the  seal  business. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Oh,  he  took  charge  of  it? 
Had  you  in  1904  any  table  of  length, 
weight,  and  measurement  of  fur  seals  to 
contradict  the  official  tables  that  declared 
a  fur  seal  2  years  of  age,  the  skin  of  which 
weighed  5J  pounds?  Had  you  any  rec- 
ords to  show  Mr.  Bowen  or  Mr.  Hitchcock? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  What  year  are  you 
speaking  of,  and  what  records  are  you 
speaking  of? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  You  must  have  had  some- 
thing to  present  to  Mr.  Hitchcock  and  to 
Mr.  Bowen  as  your  reason  for  reducing 
that  weight  from  5i  pounds  to  5  pounds. 
What  was  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  You  must  remember, 
now,  that  my  statement  was  that  that 
change  occurred  in  1906. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  1904,  you  said? 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


241 


key.  pp.  -<i-4.  265,  Appendix  A,  June 
24,'  1911,  H.  <',)m.  Exp.  Dept,  Com.  and 
Labor.) 


The  lessees  with  help  of  Lemb- 
key  in  1906,  " established"  a 
•'•  o-pound"  minimum,  so  as  to 
easier  "load"  the  -U-poimd  year- 
ling skins. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  We  have  found  on  the 
islands  that  the  most  reliable  way  of 
gauging  sealskins  so  as  to  classify  them 
into  different  ages  is  that  of  weight,  of 
weighing  the  skins.  We  have  very  re- 
liable data  showing  that  2-year-olds  sel- 
dom if  ever  weigh  less  than  5  pounds, 
and  we  also  have  data  which  give  us  the 
information  that  the  skins  of  3-year-olds 
weigh  from  6£  to  8£  pounds.  Upon  that 
basis  we  have  established  our  regulations. 
(Hearing  No.  9,  p.  398.  Mar.  1,  1912.) 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  1906  is  when  we  re" 
duced  the  weight  from  5J  pounds  to  5 
pounds.  Please  get  that  correct. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  But  in  1904  you  made 
that  recommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  To  Mr.  Hitchcock. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Have  you  any  table  of 
weight  measurement  of  your  own  making 
which  warranted  you  in  making  that  rec- 
ommendation? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  had  not.  I  expressed 
that  as  my  opinion.  (Hearing  Xo.  9,  pp. 
449,450,  Apr.  13,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp, 
Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

Lucas,  under  oath,  and  facing 
cross-examination,  tells  the  truth 
and  denies  Lembkey. 


Dr.  LUCAS.  In  regard  to  the  sizes  and 
ages  of  killable  seals,  Dr.  Evermann  has 
pointed  out  in  his  admirable  resum6  that 
there  is  no  law  against  the  killing  of  male 
seals  of  any  age.  There  have  been  regu- 
lations against  it,  but  all  I  can  say  is  that 
no  yearlings  have  been  systematically 
killed.  I  took  Mr.  Elliott's  figures  of 
1873  as  a  good  aveiage.  He  cites  the 
weight  of  2-year-old  skins  as  5^  pounds. 
I  agree  with  him  there.  I  think  that  is  a 
good  average.  (Hearing  No.  12,  p.  708, 
May  16,  1912.) 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  will  go  further  and 
submit  as  Exhibit  J  this  paper.  I  won't 
read  all  of  this  in  regard  to  the  British 
authority  on  Alaskan  fur-seal  classifica- 
tion and  what  he  says,  as  compared  with 
our  tables;  but  I  will  read  one  word  from 
a  chief  British  authority  in  an  official 
letter  written  December  21,  1892,  by  Sir 
Curtis  Lampson's  sons  to  the  British  com- 
missioners Sir  George  Baden-Powell  and 
Dr.  George  M.  Dawson.  Sir  Curtis  Lamp- 
son  says: 

••  We  are  unable  to  answer  your  inquiry 
as  to  in  what  class  in  the  sales  catalogue 
would  be  placed  a  skin  classified  on  the 
islands  as,  say,  a  7-pound  skin,  as  we  do 
not  know  whether  the  classification  you 
mention  refers  to  the  skins  as  taken  from, 
the  animals  or  after  they  have  been 
cured  and  salted  ready  for  shipment. 
The  process  of  curing  and  salting  must  of- 
necessity  add  to  the  weight."  (Seep.  916r 
Proceedings  of  the  Tribunal  of  Arbitration, 
vol.  8,  Paris,  1893.) 

Now,  let  me  tell  you  that  the  salt  added 
in  curing  a  4£-pound  "green"  yearling: 
skin  will  increase  its  weight  to  5  poundsr 
or  even  to  5£  pounds,  according  to  the* 
amount  of  salt  used. 

Now,  you  will  understand  why  a  "5- 
pound"  skin  can  not  be  taken  on  the 
islands  and  honestly,  truthfully  certified 


21588—13- 


-16 


242 


FUR-SEAL   HEKD   OF   ALASKA. 


Bowers  swears  that  the  skins 
are  classified  by  weight  as  sent 
from  the  islands. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  Do  you  have  a  report  to 
that  effect?  Have  you  seen  a  report  to 
that  effect? 

Dr.  HORNADAY.  Yes;  and  it  has  been 
published  several  times. 

Mr.  BOWERS.  I  have  never  seen  it; 
neither  have  you.  I  think  that  is  a  mat- 
ter of  record.  That  is  mentioned  in  the 
report  manufactured  by  Mr.  Elliott,  based 
upon  nothing. 

Mr.  PATTON.  You  mean  it  is  a  report 
that  is  sworn  to  by  the  people  who  do  the 
selling  in  London? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  No,  sir;  it  is  the  classifi- 
cation of  the  London  merchants  who  sell 
the  skins  for  the  United  States  Govern- 
ment. 

Mr.  PATTON.  And  they  pay  on  that 
weight? 

Mr.  BOWERS.  They  sell  on  those 
weights.  Their  classification  is  made  on 
those  weights. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Right  there  I  want  to 
interpose  the  statement  that  they  do  not 
weigh  those  skins  to  classify  them.  They 
measure  them.  (Hearing  No.  6,  p.  291; 
July  27,  1911;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com. 
and  Labor.) 


lo  Mr.  Nagcl's  Looks  us  a  skin  "  uoi  under 
2  years  of  uge."  herasiie  a  2-year-old  skin 
weighs.  Avith  ili"  same  treatment  that  this 
skin  has  received,  a  minimum  of  0  pounds. 
A  small  "runt"-  2  years  old  may  weigh  5£ 
pounds.  1  have  seen  "i tints"  that  would 
not  weigh  5  pounds,  but  we  are  not 
dealing  with  exceptions.  \Ye  are  dealing 
with  broad,  square  averages.  I  am  will- 
ing to  admit  that  a  few  exceptions  can  be 
found.  I  am  willing  to  admit  that  a  man 
might  knock  down  a  "  long  "  yearling  here 
and  there:  bill  when  he  deliberately  says 
to  Mr.  Nagel  that  a  5-pound  skin  is  a 
2-year-old  seal  I  will  take  him  to  the  s<-uls 
themselves  and  they  will  confound  him; 
and  you  gentlemen  can  easily  go  with  me. 
I  would  like  to  submit  this  ae  an  i-xhibil. 

Mr.  McGiujcuDDY.  Professoi.  t  li 
dassilh  ations    here   are   before   they   are 
salted? 

Mr.  KI.I.IOTT.  Y'-s,  sir;  1  hey  arc  "givf-n  " 
skins.  ('Hearing  No.  1.  p.'  14.  May  31. 
1911.) 

Lembkey,  who  takes  the  skins 
on  the  islands,  denies  his  chief, 
Bowers. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Let  me,  before  you  pass 
from  that,  ask  this:  You  weigh  these  green 
skins  on  the  islands,  and  then  measure 
them  in  the  markets  in  London.  What 
is  your  purpose  in  weighing,  and  what  is 
their  purpose  in  measuring? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Our  purpose  in  weighing 
the  skins  on  the  island  is  to  get  them 
within  the  weights  prescribed  by  the 
regulations.  Our  regulations  prescribe 
maximum  and  minimum  weights.  Those 
weights  are  5  pounds — 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Does  that  relate  to  the 
question  of  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Five  pounds  and  eight 
and  one-half  pounds. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Passing  from  the  weight, 
in  London  what  is  the  determining  pur- 
pose in  measuring? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  measure  them  I 
fancy 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Are  they  trying  to  arrive 
at  the  question  of  age,  too? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  are  trying  to  get 
the  size  of  the  skin  or  the  amount  of  fur  on 
the  animal.  (Hearing  No.  9,  pp.  448,449, 
Apr.  13,  1912;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com. 
and  Labor.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


243 


Lembkey  asserts  that  the  Lon- 
don classification  of  the  sealskins 
U  an  accurate  one — he  does  not 
tell  how  it  is  based. 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  These  skins  which  were 
•  London  during  the  years  1909  and 
1910  were  weighed    by  the  factors  after 
their  arrival  in   London  and  the  weights 
found  t<>  correspond  witli  th»se  taken  on 
•his  factor.  Lampson &  Co., 
is  essentially  a  disinterested  person,  being 
rued  not  the  least  with  the  question 
of  weights  or  regulations,  hut  wholly  with 
the  sale  of  the  skins  and  the  payments 
therefor,  their  verification  of  these  weights 
may  be  taken  as  conclusive  of  their  accu- 
racy. 

Ear,  therefore,  as  concerns  compli- 
ance with  the  regulations  and  the  law  in 
the  killing  of  male  seals,  no  malfeasance 
can  be  proven,  because  not  only  the  rec- 
ords of  the  department  but  the  weights  of 
the  same  skins  in  London,  taken  by  an 
independent  and  responsible  body  of 
experts,  prove  that  the  limits  of  weight 
laid  down  by  the  instructions  of  the  de- 
partment have  been  complied  with  as 
closely  as  it  is  possible  for  human  agency 
to  do  so.  The  weights  of  skins  taken  on 
the  islands  show  this,  and  furthermore 
these  weights  have  been  verified  in  Lon- 
don by  an  independent  and  responsible 
body  of  men.  (Hearing  Xo.  9,  p.  375. 
.Afar".  1.  191L>.. 

Lembkey  swears  that  Lamp- 
son's  London  classification  of  the 
sealskins  taken  on  the  seal  islands 
is  an  accurate  one,  and  by 

weight . 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Lampsnn  &  Co.  ig  a 
general  broker,  and  I  believe  the  only 
one  in  London. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  They  take  anything  from 
anybody  in  the  United  S- 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Undoubtedly.  Now. 
their  reputation  for  veracity  is  unim- 
peachable, and  has  been  jealously 
guarded  by  them  since  they  first  engaged 
in  business  many  years  ago.  The  fur 
trade  has  explicit  confidence  in  their 
statements.  The  weights  of  skins  which 
they  have  promulgated  are  as  accurate 
as  their  classification  of  the  skins  which 
they  publish  io  the  trade.  The  fact 
that  the  island  weights  and  the  Lampson 
weights  coincide  is  conclusive  that  the 
island  weights  were  correctly  taken. 
Surelv  the  committee  can  conclude  that 


Then,  under  cross-examination, 
he  admits  that  the  London  classi- 
fication is  on  measurements,  not 
weights,  and  based  on  the  sizes  of 
the  skin<. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Mr.  Fraser,  if  I  may  in- 
form the  committee,  makes  a  statement  of 
the  weight,  breadth,  and  length  of  the 
skins 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Yes. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  But  states  nothing 
whatever  as  to  the  number  of  skins  in  any 
catch. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  That  is  all  covered  in 
other  testimony. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Is  it? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  What  is  the  question 
to  this  witness? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  asked  if  he  does  not 
know  that  the  sizes  are  established  by 
measurements? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Just  answer  that  ques- 
tion. Do  you  know  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  been  so  informed. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Do  you  doubt  it? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Oh,  no. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Nor  do  I.  (Hearing  Xo. 
9.  p.  441,  Apr.  13,  1912. ) 


Lembkey  tells  the  committee 
that  they  classify  sealskins  by 
measurement  of  size,  and  not 
weight,  in  Lampson's  sales. 


Mr.  YOUNG.  Let  me  before  you  pass 
from  that  ask  this:  You  weigh  these 
green  skins  on  the  islands,  and  then 
measure  them  in  the  markets  in  London. 
What  is  your  purpose  in  weighing,  and 
what  is  their  purpose  in  measuring? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Our  purpose  in  weigh- 
ing the  skins  on  the  island  is  to  get  them 
within  the  weights  prescribed  by  the 
regulations.  Our  regulations  prescribe 
maximum  and  minimum  weights.  Those 
weights  are  5  pounds 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Does  that  relate  to  the 
question  of  age? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Five  pounds  and  8£ 
pounds. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Passing  from  the  weight, 
in  London  what  is  the  determining  pur- 
pose in  measuring? 


244 


PUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


the  charge  of  malfeasance  can  not  lie 
upon  the  practice  of  taking  skins  ;>s  it. 
has  been  carried  on  during  the  years 
mentioned.  (Hearing  No.  9,  p.  376, 
Mar.  L  1912.) 


Lcmbkey  swears  that  100  skins 
in  1904  wore  lighter  after  salting. 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  con- 
trary to  general  belief,  sealskins  before 
salting  weigh  slightly  more  than  after- 
wards. This  is  well  known  to  practical 
taxidermists.  The  effect  of  salt  on  skins 
is  to  extract  the  animal  juices  in  large 
measure  and  to  deter  the  propagation  of 
bacteria  which  would  eventually  destroy 
the  skin.  That  the  natural  juices  in  the 
green  pelt  are  extracted  through  the 
action  of  the  salt  is  shown  by  the  stiff er 
and  harder  texture  of  the  skin  after  it  has 
been  in  contact  with  the  salt  for  a  suffi- 
cient period.  The  loss  of  weight  in  a 
pelt  due  to  salting  is  perhaps  small,  but 
nevertheless  definite  and  appreciable. 

In  order  to  test  this  very  matter,  on 
July  26,  1904,  100  green  sealskins  nearly 
dry  were  weighed  by  me  on  St.  Paul  and 
then  placed  in  salt.  Their  combined 
green  weight  was  644  J  pounds.  Five 
days  thereafter  they  were  taken  out  of 
salt  and  re  weighed,  when  their  combined 
weight  was  643J  pounds,  representing  a 
net  loss  of  1  pound  in  the  aggregate 
weight  of  100  skins.  (H.  Doc.  No.  93, 
62d  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  p.  79.)  (Hearing 
No.  9,  p.  416,  Mar.  11,  1912.) 

But  Lembkey  forgets  it  one 
month  later. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Mr.  Lembkey,  you  say 
you  never  have  weighed  these  skins  after 
you  have  salted  them?  You  have  never 
weighed  them? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  I  have  never  weighed 
them  after  the  salting  on  the  islands;  no, 
sir.  (Hearing  No.  9,  p.  446,  Apr.  13,  1912; 
H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  measure  them. 
1  fancy 

Mr.  YOUNG.  Are  they  trying  to  arrive 
at  the  question  of  age,  too*? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  They  are  trying  to  get 
the  size  of  the  skin  or  the  amount  of  fur 
on  the  animal. 

Mr.  YOUNG.  They  care  nothing  about 
the  question  of  age  there? 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Nothing  at  all. 

Mr.  Young.  That  is  all  1  care  to  ask. 
(  Hearing  No.  9,  p.  448,  Apr.  13,  1912.) 

But  Lembkey 's  official  record 
on  the  island,  of  1904,  shows  that 
these  skins  were  heavier. 

[Official  journal  of  the  Government  agent  in  charge 
of  Seal  Islands:  St.  Paul's  Island,  Alaska: 

Saturday,  July  23,  1904.— On.  July  18, 
107  skins  taken  on  Tolstoi  were  weighed 
and  salted.  To-day  they  were  hauled 
out  of  the  trench  and  reweighed.  At  the 
time  of  killing  they  weighed  705  pounds, 
and  on  being  taken  out  they  weighed  759£ 
pounds,  a  gain  in  salting  of  54£  pounds, 
or  one-half  pound  per  skin  (p .  149) .  (This 
entry  was  made  by  Lembkey  himself,  as 
above  quoted,  and  copied  July  22,  1913, 
by  the  agents  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com- 
merce.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


245 


Lembkey  says  the  holluschiekic 
are  never  driven  from  shelter  on 
the  breeding  rookerie-. 


Chief  Sjx'cial  Agent  LKMBKEY:  Further- 
more, the  3-\ car-olds,  having  passed  the 
•  i'  puberty,  are  not  found  on  the 
hauling  grounds  during  the  fall,  but  are 
hauled  among  the  cows  on  the  rookeries 
when  they  can  not  be  driven.  This  is  an 
additional  safeguard  against  their  killing, 
and  of  itself  would  disprove  any  allegation 
that  these  marked  seals  are  subsequently 
killed.  (Report,  Dec.  14.  1906.  p.  13; 
Son.  Dor.  376.  60th  Cong..  1st  » 


Lembkey  swears  that  the  offi- 
cial publication  of  Elliott's  1874 
report  never  reached  the  files  of 
his  office  on  the  seal  islands. 


SAN  FRANCISCO.  November  15, 1911. 
Mr.  W.  I.  LEMBKEY. 

DEAR  SIR:  In  compliance  with  your 
request,  I  have  looked  over  the  published 
account  of  the  fur-seal  investigation,  and 
I  can  truthfully  state  that  I  consider  the 
testimony  of  H.  W.  Elliott  to  be  design- 
edly false  and  misleading,  especially  that 
part  referring  to  the  season  of  1890." 

Referring  to  the  scale  of  weights  and 
measurements  of  sealskins,  which  he 
claims  was  introduced  by  himself  and  the 
late  Dr.  Mclntyre.  I  have  never  heard  of 


But  his  assistant  says  they  are 
so  driven — are  "pulled  out  from 
among  the  cow>."  The  St.  Paul 
native  sealers  confirm  Judge  in  a 
signed  statement,  July  23.  1913: 

Assistant  Agent  JAMES  JUDGE.  Seals. — 
Four  hundred  and  fifty-eight  seals  of  the 
quota  of  500  allowed  the  natives  of  this 
island  for  food  were  obtained.  The  first 
drive  was  made  on  October  19,  from 
Staraya  Artel,  and  220  seals  were  killed; 
209  small,  sixty-liv  3-yoar-olde,  five 
4-year-olds,  six  5-year-olds,  two  6-year- 
olds,  and  4  branded  were  turned  away. 
Three  other  drives  were  made  as  follows: 
October  31.  Staraya  Artel  rookery,  148 
seals  w«-n-  killed,  twelve  3-year-oldB  re- 
leased; November  9.  Btenya  Artel  and 
north,  44  seals  killed;  November  16. 
North  rookeiy.  2o  seals  killed:  October  2(> 
to  November  10,  Zapadni  Guard;,  21 
seals  killed. 

The  last  three  drives  were  made  up 
entirely  of  seals  pulled  out  from  among  th? 
cows  by  the  natives,  and  as  very  careful 
selection  had  taken  place  on  the  rookery 
very  few  were  turned  away  from  the 
killing  field.  (Report,  June  3,  1907, 
Sen.  Doc.  376,  p.  105,  60th  Cong.,  1st 
sess.) 

Question.  Did  you  ever  use  whistles 
when  you  drove  those  young  seals  out 
from  the  shelter  of  the  rookeries? 

Answer.  No.  They  tised  to  use  them, 
but  do  not  use  them  now.  They  just  run 
in  and  yell  and  clap  their  hands. 

Question.  Did  you  ever  report  that 
work  to  the  Government  agents? 

Answer.  Yes;  it  was  always  reported  to 
the  Government  agents.  (Statements  of 
the  native  sealers,  St.  Paul's  Island, 
July  23,  1913;  made  to  agents,  H.  Com. 
Exp.,  Dept.  Commerce,  p.  98,  rept.  Aug. 
31.  1913. 

But  it  was  on  the  official  files, 
for  in  1886  the  chief  special 
agent  so  reports  to  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  United  States  Treas- 
ury. 

OFFICE  OF  SPECIAL  AGENT 
TREASURY  DEPARTMENT. 
ST.  PAUL  ISLAND,  ALASKA, 

July  SI,  1886. 

SIR:  I  herewith  transmit  my  report  of 
the  operations  of  the  seal  islands  for  the 
past  year,  and  up  to  the  close  of  this  seal- 
ing season. 
*  *  *  * 

Mr.  Elliott  embraced  in  his  report  of 
1874  a  measurement  by  him  of  the  breed- 
ing rookeries  on  this  island,  made  July 
10-18.  1872.  since  which  time  no  measure- 


246 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


its  existence,  nor  have  I  ever  heard  men- 
tion, of  it,  during  my  long  residence  on 
the  seal  islands,  where  for  many  years 
I  was  immediately  connected  with  the 
taking  and  curing  of  sealskins,  dating 
from  the  spring  of  1875  to  the  expiration 
of  the  Alaska  Commercial  Co.'s  lease,  in 
1890. 

Yours,  respectfully, 

J.  C.  HEDPATH. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  Mr.  Redpath  landed  on 
the  islands  first  in  1875,  one  year  after  the 
alleged  promulgation  of  the  Elliott  table 
of  weights  and  measurements. 

I  regret  that  Mr.  Redpath  is  in  San 
Francisco,  and  therefore  is  not  able  to 
attend  these  hearings.  Upon  my  return 
from  Alaska  this  fall,  I  obtained  and  for- 
warded to  Mr.  Redpath  a  series  of  hearings 
of  this  committee  held  last  summer,  with 
the  request  that,  after  reading,  he  inform 
me  whether  the  list  of  weights  and  meas- 
urements which  Mr.  Elliott  claims  was 
promulgated  in  1872-1874  on  the  islands 
was,  in  truth,  so  published.  His  reply 
bears  out  my  belief  that  Mr.  Elliott  simply 
has  attempted  to  foist  upon  this  commit- 
tee a  piece  of  manufactured  evidence 
bearing  a  date  so  far  back  in  the  history 
of  the  islands  that  no  one  living  would  be 
able  to  testify  as  to  its  truth  or  falsity. 
(Hearing  No.  9,  pp.  404,  426,  Apr.  13, 
1912.) 

Lembkey  (and  Bureau  of  Fish- 
eries) quotes  Veniaminov  and  mis- 
quotes Elliott,  to  deceive. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  The  cause  of  this  great 
decline  of  seal  life  during  the  Russian 
regime  was  due  to  the  reckless  killing  on 
land  not  only  of  bachelor  seals,  such  as  are 
killed  to-day,  but  to  the  killing  of  female 
seals  wherever  they  could  be  found .  And, 
strange  to  say,  the  very  evidence  of  this 
wanton  slaughter  of  females  can  be  found 
in  Mr.  Elliott's  reports,  although  he  is 
very  careful  to  keep  such  facts  in  abey- 
ance when  furnishing  his  deadly  parallel 
of  the  destruction  caused  by  land  killing 
then  and  now.  *  *  *  Let  us  now 
make  a  few  quotations  from  Elliott  to 
show  just  what  was  the  cause  of  the  Rus- 
sian scarcity  of  seals.  *  *  *  Let  us 
quote  Mr.  Elliott: 

A  translation  of  VeniaminoV.  whom  I 
have  mentioned  already,  *  *  *  occurs 
in  Mr.  Elliott's  monograph,  his  first  report 
on  the  seal  islands.  *  *  * 

In  that  translation  we  find  the  following 
quotation  from  the  Russian  writer: 

"From  the  time  of  the  discovery  of  the 
Pribilof  Islands  until  1805  the  taking  of 
fur  sea  Is  progressed.  *  *  *  Cows  were 
taken  in  the  drives  and  killed,  and  were 
also  driven  from  the  rookeries,  where 
they  were  slaughtered  *  *  *. "  (Hear- 
ing on  H.  R.  1671,  Feb.  3,  1912,  p.  114, 
H.  Com.  Foreign  Affairs.) 


ment  has  been  made,  as  far  ;•>•  the  records 
of  this  office  show. 

*  •*  *  * 

C  KG.  R.  TINGLE, 
Treasury  Agent  in  Charge. 

To  THE  SECRETARY  OF  THE  TREASURY, 

Washington,  D.  C. 
(H.  Doc.  175,  pp.  204,  205,  54th  Cong., 

1st  ness.) 


Elliott's  answer  proves  his  at- 
tempt to  deceive. 


Mr.  ELLIOTT.  On  page  143  of  my  mono- 
graph, from  which  those  extracts  were 
read  (by  Lembkey),  I  made  this  signifi- 
cant and  fair  statement  of  what  I  thought 
of  the  same,  to  AY  it: 

"I  translate  this  chapter  of  Veniaminov's 
without  abridgment,  although  it  is  full 
of  errors,  to  show  that  while  the  Russians 
gave  this  matter  evidently  much  thought 
at  headquarters,  yet  they  failed  to  send 
some  one  onto  the  ground  who,  by  first 
making  himself  acquainted  with  the  hab- 
its of  the  seals,  etc. 

• '  Why  did  Mr.  Lembkey  fail  to  read  the 
above?  The  idea  of  making  me  responsi- 
ble for  a  series  of  loose  statements  that  I 
literally  credit  to  another  man,  and  ex- 
pressly define  them  as  such,  is,  I  submit  to 
the  committee,  a  suppression  of  the  truth 
by  Mr.  Lembkey  himself,  and  he,  not  I, 
is  guilty  of  that  offense."  (Hearing  on 
H.  R.  1671,  Feb.  4,  1912,  pp.  146,  147, 
H.  Com.  Foreign  Affairs.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OP  ALASKA. 


247 


VII. 

The  statements  in  the  official  ref>orts  <•!'  Dr.  David  .Starr  Jordan,  president  of  Advisory 
l'>oard  on  Fur  Seal  Service.   I'nited  Slates  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  who  is  one  of  the 
is  cited  to  the  United  States  Senate  Committee  on  Conservation  of  National 
;rces.  January  14.  19J1.  and  to  the  House  Committee  on  Expenditures  in  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor.  June  9, 1911,  by  Secretary  Charles  Nagel  as  his  authority 
for  killing  seals  in  violation  of  law  and  regulations: 

Mr.  I'.OWKUS.  The  advisory  l>..ard.  mr-soal  service,  consists  of  the  following: 
Dr.  David  Starr  Jordan,  president  of  Stanford  University,  who  was  chairman  of  the 
International  Fur-Seal  Commissions  of  1896  and  1897,  appointed  in  pursuance  of  the 
treaty  of  February  29.  1892.  and  whose  published  report  in  four  volumes  is  the  most 
comprehensive,  thorough,  and  valuable  treatise  that  has  ever  been  published  on  all 
matters  pertaining  to  the  fur  seal  and  the  seal  islands.  Dr.  Jordan  is  the  most  dis- 
tinguished and  best  known  naturalist  in  the  world.  (Hearing  No.  2.  p.  ]09  June  9, 
1911. 

THE    DEADLY    PARALLEL. 


Dr.  Jordan  falsifies  Yanovsky's 
official  report  to  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  to  justify  the  un- 
truth stated  in  re  "Russian  killing 
of  male  and  female  seals  alike.'' 


At  once  on  assuming  control  of  the 
islands  the  Russian-American  Co.  put 
a  stop  *  *.  They  still  continued 

to  kill  males  and  females   alike.     The 

injury  to  the  herd  naturallv  continued. 
*    *    * 

In  1820  Yanovsky,  an  agent  of  the 
Imperial  Government,  after  an  inspection 
of  the  fur-seal  rookeries,  called  attention 
to  the  practice  of  killing  the  young  ani- 
mals, leaving  only  the  adults  as  breeders. 
He  writes:  ''If  any  of  the  young  breeders 
are  not  killed  by  the  autumn  they  are 
sure  to  be  killed  in  the  following  spring." 
From  this  course  of  action  he  concludes 
that  the  industry  decreases  every  year  in 
volume,  and  may  in  the  course  of  time 
be  extinguished  entirely.  (Fur  Seal  In- 
itions.  pt.  1,  p.  25,  1898.) 

Dr.  Jordan  declares  that  the 
Russians  ruined  the  Pribilof  fur- 
seal  herd  by  an  indiscriminate 
killing  of  female  and  male  seals, 
1800-1834. 


They  (the  Rusdan-Am<  riran  <'<>.)  still 
continued  to  kill  males  and  females  alike. 
The  injury  to  the  herd  naturally  con- 
un"rd.  *  *  *  (Fur-S.-al  Investiga- 
tions, pt.  1.  p.  25.  1898.) 


The  text  of  Yanovsky's  report, 
1820,  which  denies  the  statement 
of  Dr.  Jordan  in  re  Russian  killing 
of  female  seals.  Jordan  has  usea 
the  word  "breeder's"  for  "bach- 
elors" in  Yanovsky's  statement, 
and  thus  falsifies  it 

In  his  report  No.  41  of  February  25, 
1820,  Mr-.  Yanovsky,  in  giving  an  account 
of  his  inspection  of  the  operations  on  the 
islands  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  George,  ob- 
serves that  "every  year  the  young" 
bachelor  seals  are  killed,  and  that  only 
the  cows,  siekatchie,  and  half  siekatchie 
are  left  to  propagate  the  species.  It  fol- 
lows that  only  the  old  seals  are  left,  while 
if  any  of  the  bachelors  are  left  alive  in 
the  autumn  they  are  sure  to  be  killed  the 
next  spring.  The  consequence  is  the 
number  of  seals  obtained  diminishes 
every  year,  and  it  is  certain  that  the 
species  will  in  time  become  extinct." 
(Appendix  to  Case  of  the  United  States,' 
Fur  Seal  Arbitration  (Letter  No.  6,  p.  58, 
Mar.  5.  1821),  1893.) 


But  Dr.  Jordan  published  a 
translation  of  Bishop  Veniamp 
nov,  who  explicitly  denies  that- 
killing  by  the  Russians,  1800- 
1834,  when  the  seal  herd  was  de-' 
stroyed. 

The  taking  of  fur  seals  <  ommences  irt 
the  latter  days  of  September 
The  slekatchie  and  the  old  females  hav-« 
ing  been  removed,  the  others  divided  in^ 
to  small  squads,  are  carefully  driven  to 
the  place  where  they  are  to  be  killed. 
>oinetinies  mor«-  than'lO  versts  distant. 

When  brought  to  the  killing  grounds 
the  seals  are  rested  for  an  hour,  or  more, 
according  to  circumstances,  and  then 
killed  with  a  club.  *  *  * 


248 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Dr.  Jordan  denies  the  appear- 
ance on  the  hauling  grounds  of 
the  yearlings,  and  in  the  killing 
drives  before  "the  middle  of 
July." 

*  *  *  In  fact  the  records  of  the 
drives  show  that  it  is  only  alter  the  mid- 
dle of  July  that  the  yearlings  begin  to 
arrive  in  numbers,  and  by  the  time  the 
killing  season  is  over.  *  *  (Kin- 
Seal  Investigations,  pt.  1,  1898,  p.  99.) 


Jordan  asserts  and  denies  the 
fact  that  the  yearling  seals  haul 
out,  as  a  class,  on  the  islands  be- 
fore the  middle  of  July  annually, 
and  therefore  are  not  killed. 


From  the  killing  during  the  present 
season  (1896)  15,000  animals  too  small  to 
kill  were  turned  back.  As  in  the  case  of 
the  young  bulls,  some  of  these,  perhaps 
many,  were  driven  and  redriven.  several 
drives  being  made  from  each  hauling 
ground  during  the  season.  The  actual 
number  represented  by  this  total  of  re- 
jected animals  can  not  be  exactly  deter- 
mined. From  this  it  would  seem  neces- 
sary to  suppose  that  by  no  means  all  the 
younger  seals  appear  on  the  hauling 
grounds  during  the  killing  season.  In 
fact,  the  records  of  the  drives  show  that  it 
is  only  after  the  middle  of  July  that  the 
yearlings  begin  to  arrive  in  numbers,  and 
by  the  time  the  killing  season  is  over  the 
great  majority  of  the  killable  seals  are 
secured,  leaving  the  population  of  the 
hauling  grounds  almost  exclusively  year- 


()f  those  1  year  old,  the  males  are 
separated  from  the  females  and  killed 
while  the  latter  are  driven  carefully  back 
to  the  beach.  (Fur-Seal  Investigations, 
pt.  15.  1898,  p.  222;  translation  of  Bishop 
Voniaminov  by  Leonhard  Stejneger. 

But  Chief  Special  Agent  Goff 
asserts  in  an  official  entry  that 
yearlings  are  in  the  drives  as 
earlv  as  June  18. 


[P.  229:  Official  Journal,  Government  Agent,  St. 
Paul  Island,  1890.] 

\\'c<hu'is(Jn}/,  June  18,  1890. — Made  a 
drive  from  Tolstoi  and  Middle  Hill;  killed 
274.  Turned  away  19  half  grown  bulls: 
as  many  yearlings  as  choice  seals,  killed 
(i.  e.,  274),  and  half  as  many  2-year- 
olds  as  yearlings  were  allowed  to  return  to 
the  sea.  This  is  a  fair  average  of  tin- 
work  so  far  this  season,  ('('has.  J.  Goff, 
I".  S.  Chiei'  Sp'l  Agent  jn  charge  Seal 
Islands.) 

MiHtdtii/.  .him  .'.;,  1*90.— (p.  281.) 
The  X.  A.  ('.  Co.  made  a  drive  from  Tol- 
stoi and  Middle  Hill,  killing  521  seals. 
Seventy-five  percent  of  the  seals  driven  to 
th;>  village  were  turned  back  into  the  sea, 
10  per  cent  of  these  were  2-year-olds, 
balance  yearlings.  ('('.  J.  Goff.) 

Tuesday,  June  24,  1890.— (p.  281.) 
X.  A.  ('.  Co.,  made  a  drive  from  Keel'  and 
Tolstoi,  and  killed  426  seals;  about  05 
per  cent  of  this  drive  was  turned  back 
into  the  sea.  about  all  of  these  were 
yearlings. 

(T.  J.  Goff.  i 

But  sworn  proof  is  below  that 
the  yearlings  do  haul  out  as  a 
class,  and  in  the  earliest  June 
drives,  and  are  never  absent  from 
them  thereafter  during  the  sea- 
son. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Now  as  to  yearlings  on  the 
islands.  Here  is  an  official  report  de- 
tailed day  after  day  during  the  killing 
season  of'  1890,  put  on  the  files  of  the 
Treasury  Department,  and  printed,  and 
until  the  1st  of  December.  1907.  not  a  line 
had  been  issued  from  the  Government 
officialism  in  charge  of  this  business — not 
a  line  that  says  a  single  record  of  this 
work  as  to  the  killing  on  those  islands  in 
1890  is  improperly  stated  here.  The  only 
objection  they  make  to  it  was  that  I  offi- 
cially assumed  that  driving  these  young 
and  old  seals  hurt  them.  They  claimed 
it  did  not  hurt  them,  but  that  if  did  them 
good.  We  will  leave  that  open.  But  the 
killing  has  hurt  them;  they  admit  that 
now  officially.  Let  me  read,  on  page  170: 

"Monday,"  June  23,  1890.  *  *  * 
Eleven  pods  of  561  animals  driven  up; 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


249 


lings  and  2-year-olds.  (Fur  Seal  Inves- 
tigations, pt.  1,  1898,  p.  99.  Dr.  T).  S. 
Jordan.  Rept.  Feb.  24,  1898.) 


Jordan  condemns  the  killing  of 
yearlings  by  the    old    lessees    in 

1889: 


For  a  time  these  more  rigorous  methods 
had  the  desired  effect,  but  the  scarcity  of 
bachelors  as  a  result  of  the  decreasing 
birth  rates  made  it  necessary  finally  to 
lower  the  age  for  killable  seals,  so  as  to  in- 
clude, first,  the  2-year-olds,  and  in  the  end 
many  of  the  larger  yearlings,  in  order  to 
secure  the  requisite  100,000  skins.  By 


110  of  them  killed  or  one-fifth  taken,  or  SO 
per  cent  turned  away.  All  under  7- 
pound  skins,  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
wigged  4-year-olds  and  a  dozen  or  two  old 
bulls.  This  gives  a  fair  average  of  the 
whole  drive  to-day,  some  2,500  animals, 
since  518  only  were  taken. 

Those  turned  away  (nearly 
2,000)  were  95  per  cent  at  least  'long'  and 
'short'  yearlings." 

That  has  in-vor  been  disputed  to  this 
hour. 

"June  21.  1890.  *  *  *  At  7  a.  m.  1 
went  down  to  the  killing  grounds  and  fol- 
lowed the  podding  and  clubbing  of  the 
entire  drive  brought  up  from  the  Reef 
crest  and  Zoltoi  bluffs  this  morning.  The 
Zoltoi  pod  arrived  on  the  ground  long  be- 
fore the  Reef  pod — two  hours  sooner.  It 
was  made  up  largely  of  polseecatchie  and 
yearlings. 

*  Seventy-five  per  cent  of  this 
drive  was  rejected.  Every  3  and  smooth 
4-year-old  taken  and  every  long  2-year- 
old.  Nothing  under  or  over  that  grade. 

'"The  seals  released  this  morning  were 
exclusively  yearlings,  'short'  2-year-olds, 
and  the  5  and  6  year  old  half  bulls  or 
polseecatchie.  No'  'long'  2-year-old 
escaped,  and  so,  therefore,  many  5£  and 
6  pound  skins  will  appear  in  this  catch. 

'"  In  the  afternoon  I  took  a  survey  of 
Lukannon  Bay  and  its  hauling  grounds. 
*  *  *  Thence  over  to  Tolstoi  sand 
dunes,  where  I  saw  about  GOO  or  700  year- 
lings, conspicuous  by  their  white  bellies. 
*  #  *  * 

'•June  26,  1890  (on  p.  174).  I  walked 
over  to  the  Zapadnie  killing  grounds  this 
morning,  arriving  there  about  9  o'clock. 
The  drivers  had  collected  a  squad  of  about 
340  holluschickie,  which  were  clubbed 
thus — total  344  number  driven,  and  num- 
ber taken.  97,  or  about  72  per  cent  unfit  to 
take,  being  made  up  chiefly  of  yearlings, 
'short'  2-year-olds,  and  'wigged'  4-year- 
olds,  and  5-year  up  to  7-year  old  bulls. " 

I  knew  what  I  was  talking  about,  and  so 
did  the  lessees.  They  rejected.the  year- 
lings and  the  short  2-year-olds.  (Hearing 
No.  2.  pp.  40,  41.  June  8.  1911.  H.  Com. 
Exp.  Dept.  C.  and  L.) 

But  he  approves  the  killing  of 
yearlings  by  the  new  lessees,  1896, 
m  violation  of  the  rules  ordered 
May  14,  1896  (prohibiting  that 
killing) . 

Last  year  (1896)  the  hauling  grounds  of 
the  Pribilof  Islands  yielded  30,000  killa- 
ble seals.  During  the  present  season  a 
quota  of  only  20,890  could  be  taken.  To 
get  these  it  was  neces»sary  to  drive  more 
frequently  and  cull  the  animals  more 
closely  than  has  been  done  since  1889. 
The  killing  season  was  closed  on  July  27, 


250 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


these  methods  it  happened  in  1889  thai 
practically  the  whole  bachelor  herd  of 
four  years  and  under  down  to  the  year- 
lings 'was  wiped  out.  The  result  was  the 
abnormal  drop  to  21,000  in  the  quota  of 
1890.  *  *  * 

It  is  not  the  intention  here  to  justify  the 
methods  of  killing  employed  in  the  clos- 
ing years  of  the  Alaska  Commercial  Co. 
Such  killing  ought  never  to  have  been 
allowed.  *  *  *  (Fur  Seal  investiga- 
tions, pt.  1,  p.  124,  1898.) 

For  another  part  of  the  time  this  quota 
was  too  great,  and  this  led  to  waste  of  an- 
other sort  by  involving  the  premature 
killing  of  the  yearling  and  2-year-old 
bachelors.  (Fur  Seal  Investigations,  pt. 
1.  p.  193.) 

Dr.  Jordan  denies  the  appear- 
ance of  female  yearlings  m  the 
drives  with  male  yearlings. 

There  remains  to  be  recorded  the  ar- 
rival of  the  1  and  2  year  old  females. 
Their  brothers  are  found  to  arrive  at  the 
islands  about  the  middle  of  July  and 
.spend  their  time  on  the  hauling  grounds. 
Whether  the  young  females  come  with 
them  to  the  A'icinity  of  the  islands  or  are 
associated  with  them  on  the  migrations  is 
not  known.  But  they  do  not  associate 
with  them  to  any  great  extent  on  the 
islands.  (Fur  Seal  investigations,  pt.  1, 
1898,  p.  66.) 


1896.  This  year  it  was  extended  on  Si . 
Paul  to  the  7th  of  August,  and  on  St. 
George  to  August  11.  The  quota  to  be 
taken  was  left  to  our  discretion  and  every 
opportunity  was  given  the  lessees  to  take 
the  full  product  of  the  hauling  grounds. 
Notwithstanding  all  their  efforts,  the 
quota  of  1897  shows  a  decrease  of  30  per 
cent  in  the  class  of  killable  seals,  and 
when  we  take  into  account  the  increased 
number  of  drives  and  the  extension  of  the 
times  of  driving,  the  difference  between 
the  two  seasons  is  even  greater.  (Fur  Seal 
Investigations:  Preliminary  report  of 
1897:  Treasury  Doc.  No.  1994,  p.  IS.  Nov. 
1,  1897.) 


But  Lembkey,  with  13  years' 
experience,  reports  that  the  fe- 
males do  come  out  as  yearlings 
with  male  yearlings. 

On  July  1  there  were  three  yearling 
seals  in  the  drives  at  North  East  Point. 
One  of  them,  a  typical  specimen,  was 
knocked  down  at  my  direction,  to  ascer- 
tain the  weight  of  the  skin.  It  was  found 
to  be  a  female. 

Special  attention  was  paid  by  me  to  the 
presence  of  yearlings  in  the  drives.  The 
first  seen  was  on  June  28  in  a  drive  from 
Zapadnie.  It  was  so  small  that  it  was 
killed  to  determine  its  weight.  It  was  a 
male.  *  *  *  (Kept.  W.  I.  Lembkey, 
Sept.  1,  1904,  p.  77,  App.  A,  H.  Com. 
Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor,  June  24, 
1911.) 

But  Dr.  Jordan's  men  take  a 
male  and  a  female  yearling  seal 
out  of  a  drive  from  the  hauling 
grounds,  and  send  them  as  speci- 
mens to  Stanford  University. 

Sunday,  September  27,  1896.— (P.  12.) 
A  barren  cow  shot  on  reef;  skin  taken  for 
Stanford  University.  (P.  13.)  The  skin 
of  a  yearling  bull  smothered  in  the  food 
drive  from  Lukannow  *  taken  for  Stanford 
University.  (P.  14.)  A  yearling  cow 
shot  for  purposes  of  dissection  out  of  the 
drive  from  Lukannon.  Skin  taken  for 
Stanford  University.  (Official  Journal 
of  the  U.  S.  Agent,  St.  Pauls  Island, 
entered  on  p.  53,  and  copied,  July  24, 
1913,  by  A.  F.  Gallagher.) 

1  That  drive  "from  Lukannon"  was  made  on  July  27,  1896,  from  which   those  yearling  male"  and 
female  seals  were  secured,  as  above  entered.— H.  W.  E. 


Jordan  makes  denial  of  knowl- 
edge that  the  male  and  female 
yearling  seals  haul  out  together, 
or  come  together  on  the  islands. 


There  remains  to  be  recorded  the  arrival 
of  the  1  and  2  year  old  females.  Their 
brothers,  we  found,  arrive  at  the  islands 
about  the  middle  of  July  and  spend  their 
time  on  the  hauling  grounds.  Whether 
the  young  females  come  with  them  to  the 
vicinity  of  the  islands,  or  are  associated 
with  them  on  the  migrations  is  not  known. 
But  the'y  do  not  associate  with  them  to 
any  great  extent  on  the  islands.  (Fur 
Seal  Investigations,  pt.  1,  1898,  p.  66.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


251 


Jordan  makes  denial  of  the 
male  and  female  yearlings  hauling 
nut  together. 


There  remains  yet  to  be  recorded  the 
arrival  of  the  young  1  and  2  year  old 
females.  Their  brothers,  we  found, 
arrive  at  the  islands  about  the  middle  of 
July,  and  spend  their  time  on  the  hauling 
grounds.  Whether  the  young  females 
with  them  to  the  vicinity  of  the 
islands  or  are  associated  with  them  on  the 
migrations  is  not  known.  But  they  do 
not  associate  with  them  to  any  great 
extent  on  the  islands.  (Fur  Seal  Inves- 
tigations, pt.  1.  1898,  p.  66.) 


Jordan  denies  seeing  any  year- 
ling seals  on  the  hauling  grounds 
up  to  July  25,  1896. 


July  2-5.  1906. — At  the  time  of  our  first 
enumeration,  on  Ketavie,  Tolstoi,  and  the 
Lagoon  *  *  *  no  yearlings  nor  2-year- 
olds  had  appeared.  Nor  am  I  sure" that 
any  have  appeared  since,  unless  yearling 
cows  are  among  the  bachelors.  I  have  not 
seen  one,  and  I  am  not  sure  that  I  have 
eeen  a  2-year-old  (cow).  (Fur  Seal  Inves- 
tigations, pt.  2,  1898,  p.  341.1 


Lembkey,  with  13  years'  expe- 
rience, swears  that  tne  male  and 
female  yearlings  do  haul  out  to- 
gether. 

Mr. 'LEMBKEY.  This  habit  of  annually 
migrating  from  the  place  of  its  birth  to 
southerly  waters  can  be  explained  in  a 
few  words.  Probably  90  per  cent  of  all 
female  breeders  give  birth  to  their  pups 
within  a  period  of  three  weeks,  from  June 
25  to  July  15  of  each  year.  These  pups 
remain  on  the  islands  until  about  Novem- 
ber 1  to  15  of  each  year,  and  then  depart 
southward.  These  pups  return  to  the 
islands  the  following  year  practically  in  a 
mass  about  the  25th  of  July,  and  then  are 
known  as  yearlings.  While  a  few  indi- 
viduals might  arrive  among  the  first 
bachelors  of  the  season,  the  bulk  of  the 
yearlings  arrive  in  a  mass  about  the  25th 
of  July,  as  stated. 

If  these  yearling  seals  do  not  arrive  until 
after  nearly  the  whole  catch  of  the  skins 
is  obtained,  how  is  it  possible  to  compose 
the  bulk  of  that  catch  of  the  skins  of  these 
young  animals,  as  alleged  by  Mr.  Elliott? 
(Hearing  No.  9,  pp.  412,  413,  415,  Mar. 
1,  1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and 
Labor.) 

Lembkey  swears  that  he  can 
not  tell  them  apart  by  looking  at 
them  only. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  But  the  younger 
females,  and  especially  the  2-year-olds, 
are  almost  exactly  similar  in  appearance 
to  the  males  of  the  same  age,  and  it 
requires  an  expert  to  distinguish  between 
them.  I  can  state  that  with  13  years  of 
experience,  I  can  not  by  any  means 
always  determine  the  sex  of  these  animals 
while  they  are  alive  and  when  they 
appear  on  the  killing  field.  (Hearing 
No.  9,  pp.  377,  378,  Mar.  1,  1912:  H. 
Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

But  ever  since  he  landed,  July  8, 
first  on  the  islands,  he  has  seen 
yearling  seals  on  the  hauling 
grounds,  and  notes  that  sight,  as 
quoted  below. 

July  11. — Zapadnie  Rookery,  Si. 
George  Island:  The  yearling  bachelors 
are  to  be  seen  in  little  pods  of  half  a  dozen 
or  so.  *  *  *  Where  the  bachelor 
yearlings  are  at  a  distance  from  interfer- 
ence, they  play  among  themselves  like 
little  dogs.  *  *  *  •  Similar  comparisons 
might  be  made  for  the  2-year-olds,  which 
are  bigger  than  the  yearlings,  nearly  as 


252 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Jordan's  own  associate  will  not 
vouch  for  his  truthfulness. 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  4.  The  assumption 
that  the  rookeries  are  fullest  between  July 
10  and  20  "every  year,  not  a  day  earlier, 
not  many  days  later,  "  is  not  a  safe  assump- 
tion; in  fact,  it  is  not  true. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Are  you  quoting  Dr.  Jor- 
dan? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  am  quoting  some 
things  that  Dr.  Jordan  has  said. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Is  Dr.  Jordan  a  man  of 
truth? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  are  quoting  from 
Dr.  Jordan? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  want  to  find  if  Dr.  Jor- 
dan is  a  man  of  truth. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  That  is  not  for  the  wit- 
ness to  determine. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  He  is  assailing  me  in  that 
matter  and  quoting  Dr.  Jordan. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  witness  can  not 
say  whether  he  is  telling  the  truth  or 
whether  he  is  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  would  like  to  have  it  go 
in  the  record  whether  he  considers  Dr. 
Jordan  a  man  of  truth. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  witness  will  pro- 
ceed. (Hearing  No.  10,  p.  580,  Apr.  20, 
1912,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  &  Labor.) 

Jordan  declares  that  up  to  July 
25  he  has  not  seen  a  virgin  cow  or 
nubile  on  the  rookeries: 


At  the  time  of  our  first  enumeration,  on 
Keetayie,  Tolstoi,  and  the  Lagoon,  the 
rookeries  were  at  their  height,  with  more 
cows  present  than  at  any  one  time  since. 
But  all  were  not  in,  and  no  yearlings  nor 
2-year-olds  had  appeared.  *  *  *  I 
have  never  seen  one,  and  I  am  not  sure 
that  I  have  seen  a  2-year-old.  (D.  S.  Jor- 
dan, July  25,  1897.)  (Fur  Seal  Investi- 
gations, pt.  2,  pt.  341,  1898.) 


large  as  the  cows.     (Fur  Seal  Investiga- 
tions, pt.  2,  1898,  p.  300.) 

July  13. — Ketavie  Rookery,  St.  Paulw 
Island:  The  cows  are  almost  as  cowardly 
as  the  yearling  bachelors  *  *  *  (p. 
302). 

July  13—  Ardignen  Rookery,  St.  Pauls 
Island:  On  Ardignen,  one  unlucky  year- 
ling male  is  seen  to  invade  a  harem,  and 
get  routed  out  by  the  hoarse  and  furious 
old  bull  *  *  *  (p.  302). 

July  1,5. — Lukannon  Rookery,  St.  Pauls 
Island:  On  Lukannon  was   seen   a  little 
cow,   apparently  a  2-year-old,   with  fea- 
tures of  a  yearling,  arid  slender    *     *    * 
(p.  314). 

July  16. — Northeast  Point  Rookery, 
St.  Pauls  Island:  It  appeared  to  be  a  large 
yearling,  just  sotting  its  permanent 
teeth  (p.  316). 

July  16— Reef  Rookery,  St.  Pauls  Is- 
land: These  are  apparently  virgin  2-year- 
olds  *  *  *  small  side  of  the  big  bull 
fp.  319). 


But  his  associates,  Clark  and 
Lucas,  have  seen  virgin  cows  or 
nubiles  ever  since  July  3  on  the 
rookeries : 

Lukannon,  July  3,  1897. — A  small  ani- 
mal already  noted  *  *  *  a  small  2- 
y ear-old  is  in  a  harem  of  16  cows  under  the 
cliff.  (F.  A.  Lucas,  p.  544,  pt.  2.) 

Keetavie,  July  5,  1897. — A  little  animal, 
probably  a  2-year-old  cow,  is  in  a  harem 
under  the  cliff.  (G.  A.  Clark,  p.  547, 
pt.  2.) 

Lukannon,  July  10,  1897. — Under  the 
cliffs  at  Lukannon  are  five  little  animals. 
*  They  look  exactly  like  2-year- 
old  virgin  cows.  (F.  A.  Lucas,  p.  551, 
pt.  2.) 

Zapadni,  July  20,  1897. — It  is  evident 
that  the  2-year-olds  are  present  in  con- 
siderable numbers.  (G.  A.  Clark,  p.  566, 
pt.  2.)  (Fur  Seal  Investigations,  pt.  2, 
pp.  544-566,  1898.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


253 


Jordan  declares  that  the  year- 
lings can  not  be  told  apart  as  to 
sex.  Two  seasons'  experience: 

Near  by  were  two  small  seals  in  charge 
of  a  young  half  bull.  The  smaller  one 
was  shot  and  proved  to  be  a  yearling  bull. 
It  had  all  the  appearances  of  a  female,  and 
Jacob  said  it  was.  The  sacrifice  of  this 
yearling  was  valuable  in  showing  how 
<>asy  ii  is  to  be  deceived  *  *  there 
does  not  seem  to  be  any  characteristic 
which  will  surely  determine  the  sex  of  the 
young  animals  'other  than  those  of  the 
sexual  organs  themselves.  (Fur  Seal  In- 
vestigation, pt.  2,  p.  356,  1898.) 

Lembkey  says  they  can  not  be 
distinguished  apart  as  to  sex,  13 
seasons'  experience  teaches  him. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  All  the  killable  seals  of 
those  driven. 

Q.  But  they  were  all  yearlings? — A. 
They  were  all  yearlings  ;*no  full-grown 
bulls .  Those  driven  were  immature  seals. 

Q.  The  statement  has  been  made  that 
it  is  hardly  possible  to  distinguish  the 
male  and  the  female  at  that  age? — A.  At 
2  years  old? 

Q.  Yes;  what  is  your  opinion? — A. 
There  is  considerable  difficulty  in  distin- 
guishing the  young  males  and  females. 
There  is  considerable  difficulty  in  distin- 
guishing the  male  and  the  female  yearling. 
They  are  both  of  the  same  size  and  general 
formation.  It  is  almost  impossible  for 
anybody  not  an  expert  to  pick  them  out 
and  distinguish  between  them,  and  it  is 
rather  ^difficult  j  even  for  an  expert;  but 
of  the  2-year-olds  the  females  are  not  on 
the  hauling  grounds;  they  are  on  the 
breeding  rookeries  for  their  initial  im- 
pregnation. The  2-year-old  males,  on  the 
other  hand,  are  on  thehauling-out  grounds. 
(Hearing  on  S.  9959,  Feb.  4,  1911,  Com- 
mittee on  Cons.  National  Resources, 
U.  S.  Senate,  p.  10  ("Dixon  hearing"), 
Rothermel  reprint,  May  20, 1911,  H.  Com. 
Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


But  Jordan  says  the  female 
yearlings  do  not  haul  out  with  the 
males  (yearlings) .  He  knows  be- 
cause he  examines  them. 

One  by  one  the  little  yearlings  had  been 
drawn  off  until  17  had  been  examined. 
All  were  bachelors.  *  *  *  Therefore 
there  is  nothing  so  far  to  show  that  the 
yearling  females  associate  with  the  males 
on  the  hauling  grounds,  at  least  at  this 
season.  (Lukannon  rookery,  Aug.  1, 
1896,  p.  365.) 


While  Lembkey  says  they  do 
haul  out  together.  He  knows  be- 
cause he  kills  and  examines  them. 

On  July  1  (1904),  there  were  three  year- 
ling seals  in  the  drive  at  Northeast  Point. 
One«of  them,  a  typical  specimen,  was 
knocked  down  at  my  direction  to  ascer- 
tain the  weight  of  the  skin.  It  was  found 
to  be  a  female.  (Kept.  Sept.  7,  1904,  to 
Sec.  Com.  and  Labor,  Lembkey,  p.  77, 
Appendix  A,  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com. 
and  Labor,  June  24,  1911.) 


FUR-SEAL   HEED   OF   ALASKA. 


Jordan  denies  the  appearance 
of  any  bulls  under  8  years  old  on 
the  breeding  grounds : 

LELAND  STANFORD 

JUNIOR  UNIVERSITY, 
OFFICE  OF  THE  PRESIDENT, 

Stanford  University,  Cal., 

January  16,  1906. 

Hon.  THEODORE  ROOSEVELT, 

The  White  House,  Washington,  D.  C. 

DEAR  SIR:  I  beg  leave  to  acknowledge 
the  receipt  of  three  documents,  sent  by 
Mr.  Loeb,  bearing  on  the  fur-seal  ques- 
tion, viz:  (1)  A  memorandum  to  the 
President  from  Secretary  Metcalf,  (2)  the 
printed  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  De- 
partment of  Commerce  and  Labor,  and 
(3)  a  letter  addressed  to  Mr.  Loeb  by  Mr. 
Henry  W.  Elliott. 

I  notice  the  notation  of  Mr.  Elliott  on 
the  opening  page  of  the  report.  He  avers 
that  the  reduction  of  58  per  cent  of  male 
life  on  the  breeding  grounds  is  due  alone 
to  close  killing  on  land  since  1904.  This 
is  simply  absurd.  There  could  be  no 
male  life  on  the  breeding  grounds  that 
was  not  8  years  old  or  over. 

DAVID  STARR  JORDAN. 

(Appendix  A,  p.  332;  June  24,  1911. 
H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 

Jordan  asserts  that  Elliott's 
date  for  the  " height  of  the  sea- 
son" is  not  true. 


4.  The  assumption  that  the  rookeries 
are  fullest  between  July  10  and  20  "every 
year,  not  a  day  earlier,  not  many  days 
later,"  is  not  a  safe  assumption;  in  fact, 
it  is  not  true. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Are  you  quoting  Dr.  Jor- 
dan? 

Dr.  EVERMANN.  I  am  quoting  some 
things  that  Dr.  Jordan  has  said. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  Is  Dr.  Jordan  a  man  of 
truth? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  You  are  quoting  from 
Dr.  Jordan? 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  want  to  find  if  Dr.  Jor- 
dan is  a  man  of  truth. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  That  is  not  for  the  wit- 
ness to  determine. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  He  is  assailing  me  in  that 
matter  and  quoting  Dr.  Jordan. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  witness  can  not 
say  whether  he  is  telling  the  truth  or 
whether  he  is  not. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  I  would  like  to  have  it  go 
in  the  record  whether  he  considers  Dr. 
Jordan  a  man  of  truth. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  witness  will  pro- 
ceed. (Hearing  No.  9,  p.  580,  Apr.  20, 
1912;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  La- 
bor.) 


But  his  own  men  and  trained 
naturalist  finds  many  of  them 
busy  as  breeding  bulls. 

July  17. — I  walked  to  Zapadni  rookery 
and  made  a  count  of  harems  with  Mr.  Chi- 
chester.  The  part  of  this  rookery  which 
in  1896-97  extended  along  the  beach 
toward  the  watchhouse  has  entirely  dis- 
appeared. The  portion  under  the  cliff 
has  also  shrunk. 

Contrary  to  our  usual  experience  with 
the  young  bull,  a  gray  one  not  over  6 
years  old  not  only  held  a  harem  of  three 
cows  in  a  territory  backed  by  idle  bulls, 
but  refused  to  yield  ground  to  us  in  our 
efforts  to  reach  a  favorable  observation 
point.  In  addition  to  his  youth,  the  bull 
was  handicapped  by  a  stiff  foreflipper. 

Many  young  gray  bulls  are  noted  in  the 
rookery  and  about  it,  and  particularly  in 
the  larger  harems  are  many  of  the  2-year- 
old  cows.  (Kept.  Geo.  A.  Clark,  Sept. 
30,  1909,  to  Secretary  Nagel;  Appendix 
A,  pp.  883,  892,  June  24,  1911;  H.  Com. 
Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


But  Jordan's  own  " trained" 
expert  says  that  Elliott's  dates  are 
correct,  and  he  quotes  them  as 
such. 

The  breeding  season,  beginning  about 
June  10  and  extending  to  about  August 
10,  reaches  a  climax,  known  as  the 
"height  of  the  season,"  about  the  ]2th 
to  the  18th  of  July.  At  this  time  the 
greatest  number  of  cows  are  present,  the 
harem  discipline  is  rigid,  and  each  family 
is  definitely  marked  out.  After  this  pe- 
riod the  cows  and  pups  scatter  out  and 
intermingle,  the  mother  seals  spend 
longer  time  at  sea,  the  pups  learn  to  swim, 
and  the  harem  system  breaks  up. 

Harem  counts. — The  counts  of  harems 
or  breeding  families  were  all  made  within 
the  period  of  rookery  life  known  as  the 
"height  of  the  season,"  between  the  dates 
of  July  12  and  18,  these  dates  correspond- 
ing in  general  to  those  on  which  the  simi- 
lar counts  for  1897  were  made.  (Kept. 
Geo.  A.  Clark,  Sept.  30,  1909,  to  Secretary 
Nagel;  Appendix  A,  pp.  835,  838,  June 
24,  1911;  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and 
Labor.) 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


255 


Jordan  hopes  that  Elliott  will 
approve  ''an  effort"  which  will 
enable  the  pelagic  sealers  "to 
realize"  on  their  "rights": 

LELAND  STANFORD 

JUNIOR  UNIVERSITY, 
STANFORD  UNIVERSITY,  GAL., 

November  6,  1909. 
Mr.  HENRY  WOOD  ELLIOTT, 

Cleveland,  Ohio. 

DEAK  SIR:  I  have  received  from  the 
Bureau  of  Fisheries  a  letter  from  you  to 
Secretary  Nagel.  concerning  the  author- 
ship of  a  chart  which  was  inserted  in  my 
preliminary  report  on  the  fur  seals  in 
1896. 

*  *  *  * 

I  take  this  opportunity  to  express  the 
hope  that  you  may  approve  of  the  effort  to 
establish  a  modus  vivendi  for  a  time, 
without  killing  on  land  or  sea,  until  the 
matter  of  pelagic  sealing  can  be  finally 
settled.  To  lease  the  islands  again  as 
things  are  would  be  a  farce.  I  see  some 
hope  that  an  energetic  discussion  with 
Japan  would  be  successful,  and  the  Vic- 
toria people  are  anxious  to  realize  on  their 
rights. 

Very  truly,  yours, 

DAVID  STARR  JORDAN. 


Elliott  denies  the  "rights"  of 
the  pelagic  sealers,  and  hopes  that 
they  will  never  get  a  penny  for 
them : 

17  GRACE  AVENUE, 
Lakewood,  Ohio,  November  3, 1909. 
Dr.  DAVID  STARR  JORDAN, 

.  Stanford  University,  Cal. 
DEAR  SIR  :  Your  letter  of  the  6th  instant 
has  been  duly  received.  With  regard  to 
that  appearance  of  my  track  chart  in  your 
report  of  1896,  you  seem  to  be  not  quite 
clear  in  your  mind  as  to  how  it  got  in  there 
as  it  did.  Perhaps  the  following  state- 
ment of  fact  may  help  you  to  know  its 
publication  there  without  that  credit 
given  to  me  as  its  author  which  is  indis- 
putably mine. 

*  *  *  * 

With  regard  for  the  "rights"  of  those 
Victorian  sea  wolves,  I  hope  that  they 
will  never  get  a  penny  for  their  rotting 
vessels  or  their  "good  will. "  They  have 
had  far,  far  too  much  already  at  the  ex- 
pense of  humanity  and  decency.  Let 
their  vessels  rot,  and  let  their  owners  rot 
with  them. 

Very  truly,  yours, 

HENRY  W.  ELLIOTT. 


To  deceive  Congress  and  influence  pending  legislation,  Dr.  Jordan 
sends  the  following  false  and  defamatory  telegram,  which  was  used 
on  the  floor  of  the  House  of  Representatives  February  7,  1912;  de- 
bate on  H.  R.  1671: 

PALO  ALTO,  CAL.,  February  5,  191';. 
Hon.  WM.  SULZER, 

House  of  Representatives,  Washington,  D.  C.: 

To  incorporate  a  clause  establishing  in  fur-seal  bill  a  close  season  prohibiting  killing 
of  superfluous  males  would  do  no  good  to  herd,  but  would  kill  treaty.  No  one  knows 
this  better  than  the  pelagic  sealers'  lobby,  which  for  20  years  has  been  led  by  Henry 
W.  Elliott. 

DAVID  STARR  JORDAN. 

THE    DEADLY    PARALLEL. 


Jordan  reports  that  the  Rus- 
sians killed  males  and  female^ 
alike-— no  discrimination : 


Russian  management. —  *  *  Un- 
der the  earlier  years  of  its  regime  (Russian 
American  Co.),  however,  the  seals  were 
indiscriminately  slaughtered,  females  as 
well  as  males,  *  *  *.  (Fur  Seal  In- 
vestigations, Part  1,  1898,  p.  102.) 


But  Bishop  Veniaminov,  who 
spent  the  season  of  1825  on  St. 
Paul  Island,  denies  Jordan's  re- 
port. 

[Translated  by  Dr.  Leonhard  Stejneger  of  Dr.  Jor- 
dan's party.) 

The  taking  of  fur  seals  commences  in 
the  latter  days  of  September.  *  *. 
The  sikatchie  and  the  females  having 
been  removed,  the  others  are  carefully 
driven  to  the  place  where  they  are  to  be 
killed,  sometimes  more  than  10  versts 
distance  *  *  *. 

When  brought  to  the  killing  grounds  the 
seals  are  rested  for  an  hour  or  more,  ac- 
cording to  circumstances,  and  then  killed 
with  a  club. 


256 


FUR-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


Jordan  declares  that  Lembkey 
is  not  able  to  see  things  correctly 
and  report: 

What  I  meant  by  the  statement  that 
•'the  ne  :d  of  trained  supervision  is  forci- 
bly shown  by  the  present  confusion  and 
doubt  as'to  present  conditions  of  the  rook- 
eries" is  well  shown  by  reference  to  Mr. 
Lembkey's  report  for  the  past  year.  The 
one  important  subject  brought  out  by 
this  report  is  the  fact  of  a  remarkable 
diminution  of  adult  male  life.  lie  finds 
the  reserve  of  idle  bulls  small.  lie  de- 
duces from  this  a ' '  scarcity  "of  bulls.  The 
bulls  are  said  to  be  "amiable"  because 
"overtaxed."  On  certain  rookeries  they 
have  "lostcontrolofthebreeding  grounds," 
with  the  result  that  the  bachelors  are 
"hauling  among  the  cows."  He  states 
that  he  is  sure  "all  the  cows  were  served, " 
but  he  finds  that  the  bulls  "are  not  pres- 
ent in  sufficient  numbers  to  maintain  a 
first-class  rookery  service." 

If  this  is  true,  it  is  a  serious  matter  and 
needs  careful  looking  after.  In  our  rec- 
ommendations of  1896-97  we  classed  as  first 
and  mos  ^important  among  the  subjects  to 
be  determined  by  the  naturalist  to  be 
placed  in  charge  of  the  herd  a  "determi- 
nation of  the  proportion  of  males  necessary 
to  attend  to  the  needs  of  the  female  breed- 
ing herd."  Attention  was  called  to  the 
face  that  this  was  a  question  that  could 
not  be  "determined  in  a  single  season, 
nor  in  two,  possibly  not  in  five."  It 
Is  a  question  that  can  only  be  settled 
by  a  trained  naturalist  and  investigator. 
All  that  Mr.  Lembkey  has  contributed  to 
this  are  certain  superficial  facts  and  certain 
deductiors  which  may  or  may  not  be  of 
value .  The}  are  as  a  matter  of  fact  merely 
a  reecho  of  very  similar  deductions  made 
by  Mr.  Henry  W.  Elliott  in  1890.  Mr. 
Lembkey's  report  settles  nothing  and 
leaves  only  "confusion  and  doubt  " 
(D.  S.  Jordan  to  President  Roosevelt, 
Jan.  16,  1906,  Appendix  A.,  pp.  328-332, 
June  24,  1911,  H.  Com.  Exp.,  Dept.  Com. 
and  Labor.) 


Of  those  1  year  old,  the  males  are  sepa- 
rated from  the  females  and  killed,  while 
the  latter  are  driven  carefully  back  to  the 
beach.  (Veniaminov,  Russian  killing  on 
St.  Paul  Island,  1825-1834;  Fur  Seal  In- 
vestigations, Part  3,  p.  222,  1898.) 

Lembkey  cites  a  long  list  of 
Jardan's  errors  of  observation, 
and  declares  Jordan  a  failure : 

Scientific  supervision  a  failure. — In  the 
light  of  tnese  statements  of  the  efforts  of 
scientists  to  prevent  the  decrease  of  seals 
by  the  application  of  methods  on  land 
which  have  been  demonstrated  unmis- 
takably faulty,  Dr.  Jordan's  dictum  that 
the  present  need  of  these  rookeries  is  the 
"trained  supervision"  which  these  scien- 
tists afford  is  open  to  contradiction.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  every  suggestion  made  by 
scientists  who  have  visited  the  island, 
outside  the  scope  of  scientific  research., 
and  designed  to  change  existing  methods 
on  the  islands,  has  resulted  in  failure. 
(\V.  I.  Lembkey  to  Secretary  Commerce 
and  Labor,  Feb'.  8, 1906,  Appendix  A.,  pp. 
334-344,  June  24,  1911,  II .  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


FUR-SEAL   HETJD   OF  ALASKA. 


257 


Jordan    again    emphasizes    the 
"need''  of  a  trained  naturalist  to 
i  tain  the  real  facts — 

I  wish  to  emphasize  again  that  in  recom- 
mending; the  transfer  of  the  fur-seal  mat- 
ter to  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries  I  had  in 
mind  the  fact  that  this  bureau  could  pro- 
vide the  scientific  inspection  and  control 
-ary.  I  do  not  wish  to  embarras  the 
with  suggestions  as  to  the  de- 
;  administration  of  the  bureau  under 
his  charge.  This  would  not  be  pertinent. 
It  expert  knowledge  and  supervision 
could  be  brought  to  bear  on  the  control 
of  the  herd  through  any  other  method  of 
administration  than  the  one  proposed  the 
lal  point  would  be  met.  It  will  be 
notc.1  that  in  my  memorandum  only  two 
of  the  four  agents  need  be  naturalists  or 
huv«-  any  connection  with  the  Bureau  of 
Fisheries.  The  addition  of  a  naturalist 
to  the  present  staff  would  answer  the  pur- 
pose if  he  had  power  to  carry  out  his  plans. 
(Appendix  A:  Jordan  to  President  Roose- 
velt, Jan.  16,  1906,  pp.  328-332;  H.  Com. 
Ex)>.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor,  June  24, 
1911.) 


Jordan  declares  that  the  folly 
and  injury  of  the  k'seal  corral" 
were  not  his  idea,  or  of  his  order. 

The  plans  of  fencing  and  branding  the 

vere  suggestions  of  earlier  investiga- 

-hich    the   commission   of    1896-97 

merel;  3  a  part  of  its  duty.     They 

-1st  only  in  the  dis- 

•  I  agio  sealing  should  other 

means  of  prohibiting  it  fail.     It  is  true 

that  many  suggestions  have  been  barren 

of   practical   results,    but    others   arising 

from  scientific  sources,  as  the  control  of  the 

fltic  worm,  might  be  made  fruitful 

under  competent  direction.     Other  ways 

of  improving  conditions  on  the  rookeries 

would  suggest  themselves  to  a  trained  in- 

(D.   S.  Jordan  to   President 

velt:  Jan.    16.   1906.   Appendix  A: 

pp.  328-332:  June  24,  1911.  H.  Com.  Exp. 

Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


But  Lembkey  puts  a  *'  trained'3 
natural's  finding  of  ''fact"  up 
against  Jordan. 

On  one  occasion  a  celebrated  naturalist, 
walking  on  the  rookeries  at  Northeast 
Point,  discovered  what  he  supposed  to 
be  a  number  of  dead  seal  cows  and  re- 
ported it  to  the  Treasury  agent  in  charge 
of  St.  Paul  Island.  The  Treasury  agent 
telephoned  to  the  watchman  at  Northeast 
Point  and  ordered  an  investigation,  and 
was  shortly  after  amused  by  a  report  from 
the  watchman  that  the  dead  animals  sup- 
posed to  be  seal  cows  were  in  fact  sea-lion 
pups  and  not  fur  seals  at  all.  The  story 
is  repeated  here  not  with  the  intention  of 
ridiculing  anyone,  but  for  the  purpose  of 
showing  that  in  matters  pertaining  to  seal 
life  practical  experience  is  often  01  greater 
importance  than  abstract  biological  knowl- 
edge. 

The  foregoing  facts  are  not  adduced  for 
the  purpose  of  attaching  discredit  to  any- 
one. Their  citation  here  is  excusable 
only  in  showing  that,  instead  of  the  seal 
herds  suffering  from  any  lack  of  practical 
direction  by  biologists,  every  possible  sug- 
gestion that  could  be  made  by  as  eminent 
a  body  of  scientists  as  can  be  gathered  in 
this  country  was  adopted,  fairly  tried, 
and  resulted  in  each  case  in  the  abandon- 
ment of  the  idea  as  impractical,  if  not 
positively  dangerous.  In  the  light  of 
these  facts  the  position  assumed  by  Dr, 
Jordan  that  the  need  of  such  trained 
supervision  of  the  herd  is  clearly  shown 
is  plainly  untenable.  (Appendix  A: 
Lembkey  to  Secretary  Commerce  and 
Labor,  Feb.  8,  1906,  p.  339;  H.  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  and  Labor,  June  24,  1911.) 

But  Lembkey  says  that  Jordan 
approved  and  directed  this  work 
of  folly  and  injury. 

Mr.  LEMBKEY.  '2.  A  method  was  sought 
by  the  commission  for  the  prevention  on 
land  of  the  killing  of  seals  at  sea  and  the 
redriving  of  ineligibles.  The  plan  adopt- 
ed was  the  erection  by  the  natives,  under 
direction  of  the  agents,  of  about  4  miles  of 
wire  fencing  around  a  salt  lagoon  and  a 
fresh- water  lake  on  St.  Paul.  Into  these 
all  bachelors  rejected  from  the  I  illing  field 
were  to  be  driven.  After  the  1st  of  Au- 
gust drives  were  to  be  made,  also  from 
the  hauling  grounds,  and  the  animals  ob- 
tained to  be  incarcerated  in  the  inclosuree 
without  food  for  as  long  a  period  as  pos- 
sible, thereby  reducing  by  thousands  the 
available  number  of  animals  from  which 
the  pelagic  sealers  made  their  catches. 

In  evolving  this  theory,  no  account 
was  taken  by  the  scientists  of  the  fact 


21588—13- 


-17 


258  PUB-SEAL   HERD   OF   ALASKA. 


that  the  fur  seal  is  a  creature  wholly  of 
instinct,  and  is  not  able  to  adjust  itself 
to  any  new  conditions  which  prevc  nt  ii 
from  following  the  course  crystallized  into 
habit  by  generations  of  reiterated  action. 
The  theory  of  herding  these  seals  involved 
the  necessity  of  confining  them  in  places 
which,  under  normal  conditions,  they 
would  never  frequent,  and  for  this  reason 
could  not  be  put  into  successful  practice. 
The  result  of  the  inclosure  of  seals  was 
disastrous.  The  animals  were  impounded 
by  thousands.  Once  inside  of  the  in- 
closuro.  finding  their  return  to  the  rook- 
eries impeded,  the  animals  began  follow- 
ing the  inside  line  of  fence,  searching  for 
egress.  A  path  20  feet  wide  inside  the 
entire  length-  of  lagoon  fence  was  worn 
bare  of  vegetation  by  these  traveling  seals. 
This  movement  was  continued  until  many 
died  of  exhaustion.  Over  20  carcasses 
were  picked  up  in  one  day.  They  also 
fell  into  holes,  from  which  they  could  not 
extricate  themselves,  and  perished. 

That  greater  numbers  of  these  impris- 
oned animals  did  not  die  was  due  solely 
to  the  fact  that  they  could  not  be  confined 
in  these  inclosures  over  a  day  or  two. 
Some  climbed  over  the  fence,  displaying 
considerable  agility  in  so  doing;  others, 
by  main  strength,  tore  holes  in  the  stout 
wire  netting  and  so  escaped ;  others  took 
advantage  of  depressions  in  the  ground 
and  forced  their  way  out  under  the  fence. 
I  saw  one  great  bull  insert  his  nose  among 
the  wire  meshes  and  by  a  magnificent  dis- 
play of  the  wonderful  power  of  his  neck 
muscles  tear  the  wire  as  though  it  were 
rotten  yarn.  Emerging  through  the 
opening  thus  made,  and  catching  sight 
of  his  comrades  on  the  inside  of  the  fence, 
he  as  readily  tore  another  hole  through 
the  netting  and  stupidly  rejoined  his 
fellows  on  the  inside.  Had  the  wire  net- 
ting been  a  tight  board  fence,  the  efforts 
of  the  imprisoned  seals  to  escape  would 
have  resulted  in  the  death,  through  ex- 
haustion, of  all  confined. 

These  attempts  at  incarceration  were 
carried  on  through  several  years,  resulting 
in  every  case  in  the  death  of  some  animals 
imprisoned  and  the  early  escape  of  the 
remainder  by  their  own  efforts. 

These  facts  outlined  above  have  been 
reported  to  the  department  heretofore 
only  by  word  of  mouth,  owing  to  a  reluc- 
tance on  the  part  of  the  agents  to  furnish 
any  documentary  evidence  which  could 
bemused  by  Great  Britain  in  any  future 
arbitration  proceedings  that  the  death  of 
seals  was  due  in  any  way  to  methods  prac- 
ticed on  land  outside  of  the  regular  killing 
of  bachelors.  (Hearing  No.  14  pp.  945, 
946,  July  27.  1912.  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept. 
C.  and  L.) 


FUR-SEAL  HEBD   OF  ALASKA. 


259 


Dr.  Jordan  denies  his  responsi- 
bility for  the  fencing  and  branding 
fias< 

I. HI. AND  STANFORD  JUNIOR 

UNIVERSITY, 

OFFICE  OF  THE  PRESIDENT. 
Stanford  University,  Cal.. 

January  16,  1906. 
Hon.  THEODORE  ROOSEVELT, 

The  White  House,  Washington,  D.  C. 
The  plans  of  fencing  and  branding  the 
seals  were  suggestions  of  earlier  investiga- 
tors which  the  commission  of  1896-97 
merely  tested  as  a  part  of  its  duty.  They 
wriv  expected  to  assist  only  iii  the  dis- 
couraging of  pelagic  sealing  should  other 
means  of  prohibiting  it  fail. 

Very  respectfully,  yours, 

DAVID  STARR  JORDAN. 


Jordan  declares  that  his 
' '  scourge ' '  of  the  fur  seal  has  been 
overlooked  by  incompetent  men 


That  the  herd  should  be  put  in  charge  of 
a  competent  naturalist  was  the  sole  impor- 
tant recommendation  of  the  commission  of 
1896-97,  as  will  be  seen  by  reference  to 
Chapter  XIX,  pages  191-193,  of  the  first 
volume  of  the  commission's  final  report. 

It  may  be  that  I  have  underestimated 
the  completeness  of  the  reports  of  the  local 
agents.  As  I  look  over  those  of  Mr.  Lemb- 
key  for  1904  and  1905  I  find  that  they  are 
filled  with  important  data.  He  has  evi- 
dently done  his  work  well.  The  figures 
he  gives  regarding  the  condition  01  the 
breeding  herd  as  shown  by  the  compara- 
tive counts  of  the  rookeries' are  instructive 
and  show  the  continued  decline  of  the 
herd  under  pelagic  sealing.  As  I  look 
through  the  reports,  however,  I  see  no 
mention  whatever  of  the  effects  of  the 
parasitic  worm  Uncinaria.  which  we  found 
in  1896-97  to  be  responsible  for  the  death 
of  upward  12,000  pups,  or  practically  10 
per  cent  of  the  birth  rate  of  that  year. 
This  was  one  of  the  most  important  discov- 
eries made  by  our  commission.  It  is  a 
destructive  agency  which  should  be 
fought.  (D.  S.  Jordan  to  President  Roose- 
Jan.  16,  1906.  Appendix  A,  pp. 
328-332,  June  24,  1911.  H.  Com.  Exp. 
Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


But  the  official  record  declares 
that  these  twin  follies  were  or- 
dered by  him. 

ST.  PAULS  ISLAND,  ALASKA. 

Monday,  August  2,  1897.— Dr.  Jordan 
sent  five  of  his  men,  under  Mr.  Murray's 
charge,  to  lay  out  and  dig  post  holes  for 
the  fence  around  the  lagoon. 

Wednesday,  August  4,  1897. — Mr.  Mur- 
ray's men  who  were  digging  post  holes  for 
the  lagoon  fence  have  almost  completed 
the  job.  From  present  indica- 

tions Dr.  Jordan  and  his  able  assistants 
will  leave  very  little  to  be  looked  for  in 
that  direction  in  the  future. 

Wednesday,  August  18,  1897. — Messrs. 
Warren  and  Farmer  busy  all  day  endeav- 
oring to  put  the  electrical  branding  ma- 
chine in  order.  *  *  *  Messrs.  Farmer 
and  Warren  are  hopeful  of  making  it  a 
grand  success.  (Official  entries  in  the 
Journal  of  the  Government  Agent  in 
charge  of  the  seal  islands,  St.  Pauls 
Village.) 

But  Lembkey  has  furnished 
abundant  competent  evidence 
that  Jordan's  "scourge"  is  a 
myth  to-day. 

Mr.  ELLIOTT.  The  sandworm,  Uncina- 
ria, "scourge"  discovered  by  Jordan  in 
1897  is  like  the  "trampled  pups"  of  his 
"discovery"  in  1896,  a  sporadic  trouble, 
which  has  never  been  noted  on  the  islands 
prior  to  1891  or  seen  there  since  1898. 
This  I  declared  to  be  the  case  in  1872- 
1874,  and  again  in  1890. 

The  Bureau  of  Fisheries  in  1906  tried  to 
find  it,  as  follows  (p.  663,  Appendix  A): 

"In  order,  however,  to  ascertain  the 
latest  developments  in  seal  life,  Mr.  H.  C. 
Marsh,  an  expert  in  the  diseases  of  fishes 
in  the  Bureau  of  Fisheries,  was  sent  by 
Secretary  Metcalf  to  the  islands  in  the 
summer  of  1906.  Mr.  Marsh  arrived  on 
the  islands  early  in  June  of  that  year  and 
remained  there  until  the  middle  of  the 
following  August.  He  was"  rendered 
every  assistance  by  the  resident  agents  in 
his  investigation. 

"Dr.  Jordan,  in  commenting  on  the  re- 
port of  Mr  .W.I. Lembkey,  agent  in  charge 
of  seal  fisheries  (S.  Doc.  No.  98,  59th 
Cong.,  1st  sess.),  contended  that  the  num- 
ber of  bulls  reported  did  not  comprise  all 
the  bulls  present,  and  in  his  memoran- 
dum he  referred  to  the  fact  that  deaths 
among  seal  pups  due  to  Uncinaria,  an  in- 
testinal parasite,  were  not  reported. 

"Mr.  Marsh  had  instructions  to  investi- 
gate these  two  points  particularly. 

"In  the  matter  of  bulls,  Mr.  Marsh  car- 
ried maps  of  the  rookeries,  and  on  these  he 


260  FUR-SEAL   HERD    OF   ALASKA. 


depicted  the  positions  of  the  bulls  found , 
with  the  exact  number  present  when  the 
respective  counts  were  made.  The  num- 
ber found  was  fewer  than  reported  the  pre- 
ceding year,  and  verified  the  counts  of  the 
agent  at  that  time. 

"In  regard  to  Uncinaria,  Mr.  Marsh,  al- 
though on  the  rookeries  daily  from  June  6 
until  July  28,  found  not  a  single  case.  At 
the  latter  date  the  further  disturbance  of 
the  rookerio.;  v>:is  prohibited,  by  order  of 
Mr.  Sims,  on  account  of  the  activity  dis- 
played by  the  Japanese  sealers  in  the  vi- 
cinity of  the  islands.  No  naturalist  has 
since  visited  the  Pribilofs." 

The  last  search  for  this  "scourge"  of 
Jordan's  invention  was  made  by  Assistant 
Agent  James  Judge,  who,  in  his  report  for 
1909,  dated  March  8,  1910,  says  (p.  3173, 
Appendix  A) : 

"Early  in  October,  assisted  by  the  na- 
tives, I  made  the  regular  enumeration  of 
dead  pups,  a  detailed  account  of  which 
was  forwarded  Mr.  Lembkey  October  8, 
1909.  Dr.  Mills  and  I  autopsied  a  number 
of  the  dead  from  each  rookery,  the  total 
aggregating  23.  In  making  these  post- 
mortems, the  stomachs,  livers,  hearts,  and 
lungs  were  cut  into,  and  about  1  foot  of  the 
large  and  from  3  to  5  feet  of  the  small  in- 
testine carefully  examined.  The  autop- 
sio?  showed  that  death  resulted  in  20  case? 
from  starvation,  in  1  from  pneumonia,  and 
in  1  from  some  cause  unknown.  One  of 
pups  autopsied  was  killed  because  found 
suffering  and  nearly  blind  from  a  din-asc 
of  the  eye?.  The 'only  parasites  discov- 
ered were  small  threadlike  worms  found 
in  the  trachea  of  a  pup  from  the  reef. 
These  parasites,  together  with  the  dis<M. -•<•<! 
eyes  above  noted,  were  sent  to  Mr.  Oii- 
chester  for  further  investigation.  Dr. 
Stiles,  to  whom  the  worms  were  forwarded 
determined  that  they  were  a  new  species 
of  the  genus  Ifularchne."  (Hearing  No. 
14,  p.  945,  July  27,  1912,  H.  Com.  Kxp. 
Dept.  C.  and  L.) 


PUR-SEAL  HERD   OF  ALASKA. 


261 


Jordan  asserts  that  the  benefits 
of  his  work  in  1896-97  "as  "a 
trained  naturalist "  have  been 
lost  by  Lembkey. 

The  essential  point  is  the  expert  study 
and  inspection.  After  our  exhaustive 
investigations  of  1896-97,  I  made  what  I 
considered  the  one  important  recom- 
mendation— that  the  herd  be  placed  in 
charge  of  a  competent  naturalist.  Now, 
after  eight  years,  during  which  much  of 
the  value  of  our  work  has  been  lost 
through  failure  to  follow  it  up  properly,  I 
again  make  the  earnest  recommendation 
that  the  fur-seal  herd  be  placed  in  charge 
of  a  trained  naturalist.  (D.  S.  Jordan  to 
President  Roosevelt,  Jan.  16,  1906,  Ap- 
pendix A,  pp.  328-334,  June  24,  1911. 
H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and  Labor.) 


But  Lembkey  proves  that  noth- 
ing was  lost,  except  for  the  gain 
of  the  public  interests  at  stake. 

3.  The  branding',  of  female  pups:  As 
the  catch  of  the  pelagic  sealers  consists 
mainly  of  females,  especially  in  Bering 
Sea,  it  was  thought  by  the  Jordan  com- 
mission that  any  means  adopted  whereby 
the  value  of  the  skins  so  taken  could  be 
impaired  would  serve  to  deal  the  sealing 
industry  a  heavy  blow. 

From  this  idea  the  practice  of  branding 
female  pups  was  evolved. 

It  consisted  in  herding  the  newborn 
pups  on  the  several  rookeries,  segregating 
all  females  therein,  and  so  searing  their 
hides  with  red-hot  irons  that  the  hair 
follicles  under  the  brand  would  be 
destroyed  and  the  branded  area  be 
denuded  of  fur.  During  the  year  1890 
branding  operations  were  carried  on  with 
vigor.  Thousands  of  nurslings  were 
branded  with  at  least  one  brand,  and  a 
large  number  with  two  and  sometimes 
three  brands.  They  continued,  but  with 
less  rigor,  until  1903,  when  stopped  by 
order  of  the  department. 

The  main  reason  why  branding  fe- 
males was  not  a  success  was  that  if  the 
animal  were  seared  so  thoroughly  as  to 
destroy  the  commercial  value  of  the  pelt, 
the  animal  would  die  from  the  effects  of 
the  branding;  if  not  branded  in  this 
wholesale  manner,  the  value  of  the  skin 
was  not  affected  materially.  In  either 
ca.-r  no  appreciable  injury  to  the  pelagic 
catch  resulted. 

How  many  pup.?  v.-ere  permanently  in- 
jured through  branding,  and  thereby  lost 
their  lives  in  the  water  through  inability 
to  withstand  the  hardships  of  their  first 
migration  can  never  be  known.  The  In- 
dians along  the  Aleutian  chain  reported 
numbers  of  pups  as  being  so  injured  by 
branding  as  to  render  their  capture  by 
bidarki  hunters  an  easy  matter.  These 
reports,  while  creating  a  deep  impression 
among  outsiders  that  great  injury  to  the 
herd  through  branding  was  being  wrought, 
were  not  susceptible  of  confirmation. 
Complete  statistics  of  the  number  of 
branded  skin^contained  in  the  catches 
of  the  pelagic  schooners  are  not  obtain- 
able. The  number  of  such  skins  in  the 
whole  catches  for  1899  and  1900  did  not 
approximate  over  75  skins  each  year.  It 
was  reported  that  the  brands  on  these 
skins  did  not  injure  the  value  of  the  pelt 
over  the  amount  of  $1.  (W.  J.  Lembkey 
to  Secretary  Com.  and  Labor,  Feb.  8, 
1906.  Appendix  A,  pp.  338,  339,  June  24. 
1911.  H.  Com.  Exp.  Dept.  Com.  and 
Labor.  • 


-7  .'33 


YC   12594 


GENERAL  LIBBABY-U.C.  BERKELEY 


8000617616 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


